This is an application for condonation for late noting of response to an appeal noted on behalf of the respondents. Before the application could be argued three (4) preliminary issues were raised on behalf of the respondents. These are that (i) the applicant used Form LC3 instead of FORM LC 1;(ii) the application is not on notice to the other party ;(iii) the application has no legally recognized respondents and (iv) the relief being sought by the applicant is incompetent. More
The applicants are sister companies. They are into sugar-cane growing and sugar processing. They operate in the Southern part of Zimbabwe’s lowveld.
The respondent is the Minister of Environment, Water and Climate. She is the one to whom the President of Zimbabwe assigned the Zimbabwe National Water Authority Act out of which the Zimbabwe National Water Authority [“ZINWA”] was born. ZINWA is a statutory body.
The applicants concluded two agreements with ZINWA’s predecessors. The agreements related to the supply of raw water to the applicants. They were signed in 1961.
The agreements provide that the parties - i.e. the applicants... More
The plaintiff issued out summons against the 1st defendant on 25th June 2019 in which it claimed the following:-
“1. Eviction of the defendant and all those claiming through him from Mapari Ranch otherwise known as Lot 4 Devuli Ranch, held under Deed of Transfer 5251/92 within 7 days of service of the order.
2. Failing compliance with paragraph 1 above an order that, the Messenger of Court/Sheriff of Zimbabwe in charge of Masvingo together with the Zimbabwe Republic Police at the nearest Police Station in Bikita area or Masvingo District be and are hereby directed to evict the defendants... More
On 20 March 2020, plaintiff issued summons against the defendant claiming an order for divorce and ancillary relief. The defendant filed an appearance to defend and plea and the matter proceeded to pre-trial. At the pre-trial hearing, it was clear that the marriage relationship had irretrievably broken down and there was no prospect of its restoration. There was no dispute as to the custody of the minor child of the marriage. The plaintiff conceded to all the defendant’s demands regarding matrimonial property. The only two sticking issues were maintenance and access in respect to the child. These were referred to... More
This is an opposed application wherein the Applicant seeks the removal of 1st respondent as an executrix dative in the estate of the late Mehluli Dube. The Applicant is a surviving spouse and a beneficiary in the deceased estate being the subject matter of this application. At the hearing of the application, I gave an ex tempore judgment granting the order as sought by the Applicant. The 1st Respondent has since requested for the written reasons for my judgment and I hereby proceed to give my reasoning.
Before I even proceed to analyse the case it is pertinent at this... More
The facts of this matter are not in dispute, the appellant is employed by the respondent. He was employed as a book-keeper.
Initially, the respondent had an acting accountant and the appellant reported to him. The accountant’s contract of employment was terminated and the appellant alleges that he had to take over some of the accounting duties. A new acting accountant was engaged and he reverted to his original book-keeper duties. But whenever an acting accountant left his employment, the appellant would assume the duties of an accountant. More
This is an application to review the disciplinary proceedings conducted against the applicant which proceedings, the applicant refused to participate in.
The application is premised on three grounds which are briefly stated hereunder:
a)The suspension letter was improper as it failed to state reasons and grounds of suspension
b) Conflict of interest
c) Failure by the disciplinary committee to accord the applicant the right to Legal representation. More
I heard this application on 14 June, 2022. I delivered an ex tempore judgment in which I struck the case off the roll with costs.
On 1 August, 2022 the registrar of this court wrote advising me that the applicant appealed my decision. He requested reasons for the same for purposes of the appeal. My reasons are these:
The applicant, which are six housing co-operatives, were sued by the respondent, the City of Harare, seeking to evict their respective members and them from its Lot 2 of Parkridge Estate which is commonly known a Paddock 27, Crowborough Farm, Harare. In... More
1. This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court handed down on
8 September 2020, declaring “that payment by the applicant (respondent) of the sum of RTGS$235 620,99 together with interest at the prescribed lending rate calculated from 19 February, 2020 to the date of final payment shall be the full and final settlement of the respondent’s (appellant’s) debt.” More
On 26 August 2004, the plaintiff instituted proceedings in the High Court wherein it sued for $60 000 000.00 being the sum assured in terms of a motor vehicle comprehensive policy it held with second defendant. The first defendants were the insurance brokers who facilitated the policy. More
The plaintiff’s claim is based on contract between the parties. It is the plaintiff’s case that the defendant gave the plaintiff a sole mandate instruction to carry out design and performance of all contractual works in relation to the development and upgrade of the defendant’s property in Avondale. Having accepted the mandate, the plaintiff commenced work in October 2020. The instruction, inter alia, included feasibility studies, preliminary works, project costing budget, permit applications, roadworks designs, sewer drainage designs and construction of buildings. Plaintiff said it was a material term of the agreement for the defendant to pay the plaintiff for... More
The Applicant Honey and Blanckenberg, instituted interpleader in terms of r 30 of High Court Rules for the court to declare to whom it should pay an amount of $70 000 currently held in trust as rentals for certain companies. According to applicant’s affidavit, the companies in question are being laid claim to by nine different respondents. The tenth respondent, the Registrar of Deeds, was cited to throw light on the question of ownership by virtue of certain statutory returns that have been filed with it. Despite the assistance that the court would indeed have obtained from the tenth respondent’s... More
On 13 August 2020, the parties appeared before me in an urgent chamber application for stay of execution filed by the applicants. The salient facts are that, on 3 February 2020, the parties appeared before JUSTICE TSANGAunder HC 670/20 after the first respondent filed an urgent chamber application. An interim order was granted with the following operative part:
“INTERIM RELIEF SOUGHT
That pending the return date, the applicant is granted the following relief:
1. The respondent be and is hereby ordered to within 48 hours of the granting of this order return to the applicant’s possession the following property:
(a)... More
Plaintiff and defendant were married on 2 September 1978 under the then Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11] as evidenced by the marriage certificate a copy of which was tendered as an exhibit. The marriage was blessed with three children, Blessing T. Shiriyapenga (born 25 September 1979), Obrian O. Shiriyapenga (born 4 July 1962) and Obey T. Shiriyapenga (born 11 December 1985). On 21 October 2021 plaintiff issued out summons for divorce and ancillary relief. In her declaration she averred that the marriage of the parties has irretrievably broken down and there is no prospect of restoration of a normal marriage relationship... More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal is provided for by the Public Service Regulations S.I. 01/2000 in its section 51 (1) a&b. Respondent opposed the appeal.
The grounds of appeal were nine-fold. However some of the grounds raise reviewable issues which cannot be dealt with in this appeal. The remaining grounds of appeal basically challenge the main finding by the disciplinary authority that appellant committed the act of misconduct as charged. The charge laid by the respondent’s letter dated 20th May 2020 was “ Improper and Incompetent performance of duties.” More
