This is a common law application for rescissionof judgment. This application was initially brought by 181 applicants. All except applicant failed to file supporting affidavits to the application resulting in them withdrawing their applications. The applicant is a former employee of second respondent. The first respondent is a former director and operations manager of second respondent. The Registrar was cited in his official capacity and did not oppose the application. More
This matter was set down as a rescission of judgment application. This followed a judgment made in favour of the respondent in a case where the applicant had failed to comply with the rules that is where he had failed to file his heads of argument upon receipt of the respondent’s response. More
On 19 January, 2018, the applicant filed what he termed an “Urgent Chamber Application for a Spoliation Order and Interdict” against the first and second respondents. More
In this matter the applicants all employees of the respondent company had a grievance concerning non payment of wages. The parties went for arbitration and an award was made in favour of the applicants on 14 November 2010. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the National Hearing Committee which upheld the decision of the Hearing Committee.
The brief facts are that Appellant was employed by the Respondent. He is alleged to have inflated his overtime claims. He was charged and brought before the Hearing Committee which found him guilty and recommended his dismissal. Dissatisfied with this decision, Appellant appealed to the National Hearing Committee which proceeded to uphold the decision of the Hearing Committee. Appellant has now approached this Court for relief. More
From the papers filed coupled with the detailed submissions made by both counsel it is apparent that the applicant and the first respondent are literally fighting over the ownership of stand number 7953 Tynwald of Stand 7739 Tynwald Township, Harare.
The conflict between the two parties has manifested itself mainly over the control of the educational activities which are taking place within this stand. Both parties are laying claim to these educational activities.
The applicant has sought to be granted interim relief interdicting the first, second, third and fourth respondents from interfering with the running of the educational institution pending... More
MUZOFA J. The plaintiff issued out summons against the defendant claiming the following relief:
1. US$25 000 being salaries the defendant unlawfully awarded herself
2. $3 956.85 unlawfully encashed leave days
3. $11 688 excess school fees claimed by the defendant
4. $5 000 school fees claimed for a child no longer in school.
5. Return of a motor vehicle a Nissan Captiva registration number ACC 3926 that defendant illegally sold to herself
6. Return of a laptop illegally taken from plaintiff by the applicant.
The plaintiff also claimed interest on the amounts at the prescribed rate from the date... More
This is an appeal against a determination by an arbitrator sitting at Harare. The facts of the matter appear to be common cause. The respondent was an employee of the appellant. He was dismissed from employment without due process being followed by the employer. He was therefore unlawfully and wrongfully dismissed. These are factual findings made by the Learned Arbitrator. The Arbitrator ordered the appellant to pay the respondent all that was due to him. This order aggrieved the appellant leading to the present. More
This is a claim for the recovery of several sums of money in damages emanating from a horrendous head on collision between a minibus owned by the plaintiff (the commuter omnibus) and a heavy “HOWO” truck (“the HOWO truck”) belonging to the 2nd defendant. Horrendous in that the accident claimed the lives of several people aboard the minibus. The claim is predicated on plaintiff’s assertion that the collision was caused entirely through the negligence of the driver of the HOWO truck. The 1st and 3rd defendants are the driver of the HOWO truck and the 2nd defendant’s insurers respectively. More
The applicant carries on business as a transport operator. During the months of November 2008, December 2008 and January 2009 the applicant availed to its employees fuel coupons and food hampers as part payment of remuneration due to them.
Following an audit of the applicant’s business by the respondent in June 2009, the respondent wrote to the applicant’s accountants contending that the fuel coupons and food vouchers should be treated as remuneration in foreign currency and that PAYE in respect thereof should have been paid by the applicant in foreign currency. The applicant contended that the issuance of fuel coupons... More
The applicant has approached this court seeking to be admitted to bail pending trial in terms of s 117A of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 09:07]. He is facing a charge of robbery contrary to s 126(1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. In terms of s 50(1) (d) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the applicant has a constitutional right to be admitted to bail. He should be denied bail if there are compelling reasons to show that his admission to bail will defeat the interests of justice. More
The applicant filed a chamber application which she called “chamber application for conversion of court application to an action claim”. In the chamber application she averred as follows:
“Application is hereby made for an order in terms of the order/draft order annexed to this application on the grounds that:
1. Applicant issued a Court Application for a Declaratory Order in case No. HC 303/16 for her rights over stand No. 9162 Whitecliff.
2. 2nd Respondent has filed his notice of Opposition whilst 1st Respondent has not opposed the matter.
3. It is apparent from the papers that the versions of... More
The appellant is seeking the setting aside of an order of the Magistrates’ Court whereby the respondent successfully obtained a downward variation of maintenance set aside. More
