This is an appeal against a decision by an arbitrator. The grounds of appeal are that:
1) The Learned Arbitrator erred at law at in failing to find that the respondent was guilty of wilful obedience to a lawful order.
2) The Learned Arbitrator erred in failing to find that there were no mitigatorycircumstances and that dismissal was the appropriate penalty.
The respondent was employed by the appellant as a security guard. He was performing his duties at Delta, Mvurwi which is one of the appellant’s clients. During the performance of his duties he caused the arrest and subsequent dismissal... More
The respondents were employed by the appellant as security guards. Following the respondents’ visit to the appellant’s offices in Harare to claim arrear salaries, the respondents were charged with absenteeism and were dismissed. The matter ended up in arbitration and the arbitrator found in favour of the respondents. The appellant is dissatisfied with the award and has appealed to this court. More
This is an application for review.
The applicant was employed by the 2nd respondent in 2007. On 7 August 2013, the applicant was transferred to New Ambassador Hotel as an acting Front Office Manager. The appellant submitted that the substantive front office manager had then been suspended on allegations of various acts of misconduct. More
This matter was set down as an appeal against the arbitrator’s decision where he refused to hear the appellant employer’s rescission of judgment application on account of the fact that it had instituted multiple proceedings and such was contrary to the spirit of the law. More
This is an application for bail pending trial. Applicant is facing a charge of unlawful possession of raw ivory in contravention of Section 82(1) of the Parks and Wildlife (General Regulations 362/1990) as read with section 128 (b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act(Chapter 20:14). The applicant denies the charges and avers that he is a proper candidate for bail. The State opposes this application.
Factual Background
The State alleges that on the 15th November 2021 at Mlibizi Turnoff, Binga, the applicant and his co-accused were found in possession of one piece of raw elephant tusk without a permit, after... More
The plaintiff issued a summons for Provisional Sentence on a liquid document claiming from the defendant an amount of US$10 500-00. The plaintiff averred that its claim is based on a letter dated 27 July 2009 executed by the defendant’s accountant acknowledging the debt due. The letter states that an amount of US$15 000-00 is payable to the plaintiff. The letter also states “We wish to pay yourselves $500-00 .... weekly or US$2 000-00 a month.” More
This is an appeal against the decision of Respondent’s Disciplinary Committee, in terms of which Appellant was found guilty of misconduct and dismissed from employment. More
Eduardo Couture, made the following seminal remarks in an article published in (1950) 25 Tulane Law Review at 7 which the full bench of the Supreme Court in MDC&AnorvChinamasa&Anor NNO 2001(1) ZLR 69(S) 79A-C cited with approval: More
1. This is an urgent application for an interim interdict pending a decision in a hearing on the return date. The applicant seeks a provisional order couched in the following terms:
Terms of the final order sought
That you show cause to this Honourable Court if any, why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
i. Respondent and its members, associates and nominees be and (sic) hereby interdicted from interrupting and disrupting the applicant’s celebration of “Isithembiso” ceremony for all time to come without an order of a competent court.
ii. Respondent to pay the costs. More
The respondent was employed by the appellant as a Housing Officer. He was indicted for a disciplinary hearing on 11 November 2017 before the appellant’s Disciplinary Committee. He was charged with ‘committing any act or conduct inconsistent with the fulfilment of the express or implied conditions of the contract of employment’ in terms of clause 8(d) of Statutory Instrument 87/2017, specifically that he unilaterally and unlawfully exempted some council tenants from paying rentals which resulted in the appellant losing revenue. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court sitting at Bulawayo. The judgment upheld the respondent’s court application for the registration of an arbitral award against the appellant in terms of the Arbitration Act [Chapter7:15] (UNCITRAL) Model Law Schedule (Section 2) (Model Law). More
This matter came as an urgent chamber application. In a 66 page application, applicant in short/simpler terms averred that it and 1st respondent entered into a Joint Venture Agreement (J.V.A.) for the purpose of operating a safari business among other objectives.
Applicant further averred that first respondent breached the terms of the Joint Venture Agreement and was given due written notice of intention to terminate the agreement should it (respondent) fail, refuse or neglect to remedy the breach. The breach was not remedied and the Joint Venture Agreement was terminated. Despite termination, 1st respondent allegedly continued to be in occupation... More
The application before the court is one for a declaratur initiated under s85 (1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. The applicant challenges the constitutional validity of the Land Commission (Gazetted Land) (Disposal In Lieu of Compensation) Regulations, 2020 (S.I. 62 of 2020) (hereinafter referred to as the regulations). The regulations were promulgated by the first respondent on 13 March 2020 in terms of s 21 as read with s 17 of the Land Commission Act (the Act). The applicant argues that the regulations violate his right to agricultural land, his right to property, his right to administrative justice and the... More
TAKUVA J: The applicants have approached this court on a certificate of urgency seeking the following interim relief.
Final order sought
That you show cause why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. The provisional order be and is hereby confirmed.
2. That 1st respondent’s failure to ensure an adequate and consistent supply of clean and safe water to Mkoba be and is hereby declared to be a violation of the applicant’s right to clean safe and portable water protected under section 77(a) of the Constitution.
3. That the 2nd and 3rd respondents’ failure to... More
