The applicant seeks an order setting aside an arbitral award handed down by the second respondent on 16 August 2010. The applicant avers that the award is in conflict with the public policy of Zimbabwe in the following material respects:
a) “The Arbitrator made a determination on the issues not placed before him for adjudication.”
b) “A breach of the rules of natural justice occurred in connection with the making of the award.”
c) “The award conflicts with the substantive law of Zimbabwe in material respects.” More
The brief facts of the case are that the respondent who was on “fixed term contract of employment with the appellant approached the GDC after he had failed to recover value for the days which he says he had accrued at the respondent’s. Based on the evidence presented before it both oral and written the GDC ruled that indeed the employee had made out a good case for payment for the days he had accrued when he was still in the appellant’s employment. To that end the GDC ordered the appellant to pay the respondent for those days More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The first and second respondents are former employees of the appellant. They were employed in the capacities of shift manager and factory manager respectively on fixed term contracts. Such contracts were for a two year period. The last contracts ran from the 1st of April 2012 to the 31st of March 2014. More
The above matter came before me on the unopposed roll. I raised certain issues with the plaintiff’s legal practitioners and requested for a supplementary affidavit and heads of argument to be filed in the matter. This has since been done.
The plaintiff is a trust, whose trustees at the time of the institution of the above action were given in the declaration. The nature of the trust and whether it is a non- profit making trust were not disclosed in the papers before me. I also overlooked directing the plaintiff to deal with this issue in its supplementary papers. More
The brief background of the matter is that the appellant is employed by the respondent. He was employed at the Mazowe Catchment as Loss Control Officer from 16 October 2006 to August 2011. It has been submitted that his duties involved safeguarding and protecting ZINWA resources from damages, theft and any other potential losses and hazards. It is alleged that in April 2011 during the Easter Holiday the appellant went to Goromonzi Water Supply Station and took away some pipes belonging to ZINWA without authority from his superiors. By then he was on study leave. It has also been submitted... More
This is an urgent chamber application for stay of execution of an order sounding in money against the Applicant. The applicant is seeking the following order-
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
1. Application for stay of execution be and is hereby granted.
2. Seizure and attachment in execution by the 9th Respondent as a result of writs stamped by the Sheriff on the 16th June 2022 be and is hereby stayed until the Application for rescission of Default Judgment has been finalized.
3. Each party to bear its own costs. More
1. The applicant seeks an order declaring that a court order granted against the respondent was compromised by subsequent settlement agreements entered into by the parties, notably, a deed of settlement and seeks relief based on the settlement. More
The plaintiff in this case issued summons out of this court seeking the eviction of the defendant, $276 000 000-00 being a claim for unjust enrichment and holding over damages in the sum of $10 000 000-00 per month calculated from 1 April 2006 till date of eviction. The basis of the plaintiff’s claim as set out in his declaration is as follows: He is the executor dative to the estate of the Late Kainos Gadaga (deceased). During his lifetime the deceased purchased an immovable property being stand number 3750 Kuwadzana 3 Harare. This was an undeveloped stand. He then... More
Appellant’s attorney summarised the grounds of appeal in triplicate thus;
1. The Health Services Board (HSB) erred in failing to find that the charges against appellant were not proven.
2. HSB erred by imposing a penalty not provided for by the Health Service Regulations. (The attorney did not bother to cite the Regulations ‘ reference numbers).
3. HSB erred in failing to find that the dismissal was unreasonable and irrational. More
On 10 June, 2013 the first respondent obtained judgment in the magistrates’ court against the applicants. The judgment which the court a quo granted to the first respondent in the sum of $51 051-98 was for arrear rentals, operational costs, interests and collection commission. More
The 27 year old accused was arraigned before us facing the charge of murder as defined in section 47 (1) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act [Chapter 9:23]. More
The applicant applies for condonation of late noting of appeal and extension of time to note the appeal if condonation be granted. The background to the application is set out below.
The applicant was charged with the offence of Murder as defined in s 47(1)(a) of the Criminal Law Codification & Reform Act, [Chapter 9:23]. He was arraigned for trial before MUSAKWA J (as then he was) sitting with assessors at Mutare on High Court circuit on 19 February 2018. On 23 February 2018, the applicant was convicted of Murder as charged. He was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment. More
Applicant applied to this Court for condonation of a belated application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The application was made in terms of Rule 14 as read with Rule 32 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Respondent opposed the application.
At the onset of oral argument respondent raised three (3) points in limine which shall be dealt with in turn. More
On 13 December 2011 the plaintiff, a mining equipment supplier, issued summons out of this court seeking payment of the sum of US$325 119-65 being the invoiced cost of electrical goods that it sold and delivered to the defendant, a mining conglomerate, between 20 August 2009 and 12 December 2011, interest at the prescribed rate from 21 November 2011 and costs of suit.The claim was made up of goods worth US$ 78 485-61 delivered to Shamva Gold Mine, US$ 245 467-82 delivered to How Gold Mine, US$626-96 delivered to Redwing Gold Mine, and US$ 36 184-02 delivered to Mazowe Gold... More
On 4 June 2020 and 21 September 2020, I heard argument in relation to an application by Goldlock Industries (2003) (Pvt) Ltd (Under Liquidation) for a declaratory order and reserved judgment. The application in casu was brought by the liquidator of the applicant acting under a certificate of appointment issued by the 6th respondent (the Master of the High Court). The relief sought was couched in the following terms:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. That any action or proceedings against the applicant shall not be proceeded with or commenced with effect from the date of the provisional order without the... More
