1. This is an appeal against the whole determination done by a designated agent for the National Employment Council for the Air Transport Industry dated the 31st March 2023. More
This is an opposed application for leave to appeal against a decision of the Supreme Court (“the court a quo”) made in terms of s 167(5)(b) of the Constitution as read with r 32(2) of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016 (“the Rules”). More
This appeal emanates from an election petition lodged with the Electoral Court to nullify the election of the respondent and to declare the petitioner (the appellant herein) duly elected as the Member of Parliament for Chegutu West. The disputed election was held on 30 July 2018. More
This matter has trudged a long and tortuous journey. The applicants are former employees of the respondent who were charged with misconduct and dismissed in 2005 following disciplinary processes. The applicants challenged their dismissal right up to the Labour Court in case number LC/H.15/06. The Labour Court found for the applicants on 5 July, 2007 and ordered their reinstatement, alternatively, payment of damages in lieu of reinstatement. The respondent opted to pay damages, caused their quantification on 10 December 2008 equivalent to 5 years salary using the cut off date of 5 July, 2007 and tendered them to the applicants. More
This is an application for quantification of damages consequent upon a remittal by the Supreme Court in its judgment No. SC 21/14 pitting the same parties. More
Applicants aver that labouring under a number of “boo-boos”, the court issued a judgment in their absence in a matter affecting their interests. In that respect, applicants have moved the court to set aside that 2 February 2020 judgment (per PHIRI J), in terms of rule 29 of the High Court Rules 2021 (the successor to r 449 in the old High Court Rules 1971). This rule permits a party to approach the court in circumstances where a judgment was erroneously granted, in its absence and in a matter affecting that party`s interests. Determination of this matter hinges in the... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent disciplinary authority where it found appellant employee guilty of improperly associating with school pupils where he allegedly proposed love to one RudoGwatidzo who was a new comer at the school he was teaching. Facts of the matter are that appellant was brought before a disciplinary committee after allegations of improperly associating with 3 school girls had been levelled against him. Following the hearing he was found not guilty in respect of the other 2 girls who did not come to testify against him. He was however found guilty in respect... More
This matter was filed as an urgent chamber application on 29 October 2021. The applicant was seeking the following provisional order:
TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. The applicant’s possession, use and occupation of Plot No.9 Carrisbrooke Farm, Seke District, Mashonaland East, be and is hereby declared to be lawful.
2. The first respondent and all those acting through her, be and are hereby barred from interfering, occupation or use in any manner of Plot No.9 Carrisbrooke Farm, Seke District,... More
The applicant is in remand prison on allegations of murder. Acting in consort and common purpose with three others he is alleged to have assaulted and murdered the deceased accusing him of having stolen his money. The offence was committed in 2007. More
The applicant’s discharge came about following an incident which occurred whilst he was performing his duties. The applicant was fixing a police vehicle when brake fluid spilt into his right eye. The damage caused could not be reversed resulting in the applicant losing sight in that eye. March 2015 and the applicant was found to be fit for full duty. Challenges experienced in the discharge of his duties led to a second board which was convened on 14th February 2019. The Medical Board noted that the applicant had right eye blindness with no light perception. He was experiencing pain and... More
Applicant applies for bail pending trial based on changed circumstances. The application was made in terms of section 116(c)(ii) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. He was arrested on one count of armed robbery together with his co-accused, one Brown Mubaiwa under CRB HREP 1062-63/21. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award handed down on the 9th February 2012.
The factual background is as follows;
The appellant was employed as a Technician by Siemens (Pvt) Ltd a company whose telecommunications business was purchased by Paragon Communications (Pvt) Ltd on the 1st February, 2007. The appellant was consequently transferred to Paragon Communications on the same terms and conditions as under the previous contract. The appellant referred a complaint to the Labour Office of an unfair labour practice arising out of the fact that, contrary to the express terms of his contract of employment, the respondent... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Negotiating Committee which upheld the decision of the Local Joint Committee in a labour dispute between the appellant employee and the respondent employer.
The background to the matter is that the appellant who was in the respondent’s employment as a Salesman was accused of having breached the National Employment Council for the Commercial Sectors Employment Conduct Code of Conduct and Grievance procedures Statutory Instrument 45 of 93. More
The appellant was charged and convicted of one count of rape by the Regional Court sitting at Beitbridge Magistrates’ Court on 5 June 2015. The conviction came against the appellant’s plea of not guilty. Upon conviction the appellant was sentenced to ten years imprisonment of which three years were suspended on the usual good conditions.
The appellant appealed against both conviction and sentence challenging mainly the evidence of identification relied upon by the court a quo in identifying him as the assailant.
The appellant’s elaborate grounds of appeal were given as follows; More
