The applicant was granted bail by myself on application filed under case number B1359/20. The bail was granted on 2 September, 2020. The applicant faces charges of incitement to commit public violence as defined in s 187 (1) (a) as read with s 36(1) (a) and s 36 (a) (b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act. The details of the bail orders which I granted were as follows:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. Accused is granted bail on the following conditions:-
1.1. The conditions of bail imposed on accused in case number CRB ACC 77/2020
shall apply in... More
This is an application for alteration of bail conditions to enable the applicant to uplift his passport from the Clerk of Court so that he is able to travel to South Africa to deliver a keynote address at a journalism event on 14 August 2021 and for the temporary suspension of his reporting conditions for the duration of his 7 day stay in that country. More
This is an application for quantification. The Applicant has given it the title “Quantification for arrear salaries, Benefits and damages in lieu of Reinstatement”. More
Prior to May, 2001 the applicant was the owner of a piece of land which is known as Glebe [“Glebe”]. Glebe is situated in the district of Goromonzi. It is 669.19 hectares in extent. More
The applicant seeks the following relief as per the draft order:-
“IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. The applicant be and is hereby declared to be the lawful occupier and owner of portion of the Globe Farm measuring 142,38 hectares held under Deed of Transfer No. 224/96.
2. The offer letters issued to the 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents by the 1st respondent be and are hereby declared to be unlawful and wrongful and accordingly set aside.
3. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents are declared to be in unlawful occupation of the portion of the Glebe Farm, measuring 142,38 hectares,... More
The applicant issued summons against the respondents seeking an order that
1. 3rd to 5th respondents be ordered to vacate the remaining extent of “The Glebe” measuring 142.38 hectares which was allocated to the applicant;
2. The respondents be ordered to comply with and respect the order of the Administrative Court in case number LA2898/02;
3. The respondents be interdicted from harassing and interfering with the plaintiff and its affairs at “The Glebe” farm;
4. Any other document or authority in relation to the piece of land allocated to the plaintiff and captured in the order of the Administrative Court... More
This is an application in which the applicant seeks the following order:
“It is ordered that:
1. The respondent’s suspension letter of the 14th August 2011 be and is hereby declared null and void.
2. The disciplinary hearing held on the 3rd October 2011 and subsequent proceedings be and is (sic) hereby declared null and void and the respondent is hereby barred from further charging and prosecuting the applicant.
3. The respondent be and is hereby ordered to reinstate the applicant without loss of salary and benefits.
4. The respondent shall pay the costs of this application.” More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of an appeal against an arbitral award. Applicant’s manager states in the founding affidavit that the award was handed down on 9 November 2015 but was not received by the applicant until 6 May 2016. He further states that an accountant had misplaced the award and only confessed at the beginning of May 2016. Applicant’s manager avers that there are good prospects of success and that the delay that will be occasioned by this application is minimal but necessary regard being had to the importance of the case. More
On 4 October 2017 the plaintiff issued summons seeking the following relief:
1. An order declaring the 1st to 3rd defendants creation of grower number 346 in the name of TIV Rukatya Estate (3rd respondent)and/or to the benefit of the 2nd and 3rd defendants and all subsequent payments of funds and proceeds into that account to be unlawful and null and void.
2. An order declaring the creation of grower number 346 in the name of TIV Rukatya Estate to have been intended to be (and/or resulted in) an unlawful diversion of proceeds and revenue to grower number 591 and... More
The parties in this matter have been engaged in protracted litigation that commenced with the plaintiff issuing summons against the defendant in May 2016. In the summons, the claim is stated as follows:
a) “Payment in the total sum of ($30 286 747.86) Thirty Million Two Hundred and Eighty-Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty-Seven United States Dollars and Eighty-Six Cents.
b) Interest on the above amount from 15 February 2016 being date of demand to date of full payment.
c) Costs of suit.
Being payment for architectural services rendered by Plaintiff to defendant at Defendant’s specific request and instance during... More
On 13 May 2016, the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant, claiming the following:
“a) Payment in the total sum of ($30 286 747.86) Thirty Million Two Hundred and Eighty Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty Seven United States Dollars and Eighty Six Cents.
b) Interest on the above amount from 15 February 2016 being date of demand to date of full payment.
c) Costs of suit.
Being payment for architectural services rendered by Plaintiff to defendant at Defendant’s specific request and instance during the period extending from (sic) to 2013 in Victoria Falls, which amount despite demand remains due... More
This is an application for a prohibitory interdict against the respondents. The salient facts of the matter are that the applicant entered into a written housing off-take agreement (the contract) with the second respondent, National Social Security Authority (NSSA) on 14 July 2017 in terms of which the applicant was the developer and the second respondent was the beneficiary. The applicant as the developer was to acquire land and construct 8000 housing units with the second respondent being an off-taker of all the housing units in question. Put differently, the applicant agreed to sell to NSSA and NSSA agreed to... More
