The plaintiff issued summons against the defendants claiming the following:
(a) The setting aside of the agreement of sale between the first defendant and second defendant;
(b) An order directing the third defendant to transfer the rights, title and interest in Flat 196 Block 40 Odzi Flats into the plaintiff’s name; and
(c) Costs of suit against the first and second defendants jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Arbitrator who confirmed the dismissal of the Appellants by the Respondent University.
Facts of the case are that; the Appellants who were employed as Information Record Clerks by the Respondent were brought before a Disciplinary Committee on allegations of conducting themselves in a manner inconsistent with the conditions of their employment and fraud in contravention of the National Code of Conduct SI 15 of 2006. More
The matter was heard in Mutare in May 2010. The parties by consent agreed to file Supplementary Heads of Argument. The court would thereafter hand down judgment on the basis of the written submissions. After the date of hearing the record got misplaced in the registry. It was only referred back to me in July 2013 for hand down of judgment. Any inconvenience to the parties is sincerely regretted.
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Security Sergeant and had been employed in that capacity for 10 years. He was suspended from employment on 22 October 2003 on... More
The matter was heard in Mutare in May 2010. The parties by consent agreed to file Supplementary Heads of Argument. The court would thereafter hand down judgment on the basis of the written submissions. After the date of hearing the record got misplaced in the registry. It was only referred back to me in July 2013 for hand down of judgment. Any inconvenience to the parties is sincerely regretted.
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Security Sergeant and had been employed in that capacity for 10 years. He was suspended from employment on 22 October 2003 on... More
[1] This is an appeal against the order of the High Court discharging with costs a provisional order granted in favour of the appellant on 17 June 2014. More
The material background facts to the matter are as follows. The 1st Respondent on 5 May 2021. referred to Applicant a claim for unfair dismissal. This was based on allegations that he had been verbally dismissed by 2nd Respondent’s General Manager. The Applicant submitted before Applicant that he had been employed as Operations Compliance Manager. He had worked for 2nd Respondent for more than 34 years. He was due to retire in November 2020 after attaining the age of 65 years. He was however verbally terminated on 30 April 2020. Applicant was therefore claiming an unfair termination as the 2nd... More
This is an urgent chamber application wherein the applicant seeks an order on the following terms:
“Interim relief sought
That pending the determination of this matter, the applicant is granted the following relief:
1. The 1st and 2nd respondents and all those claiming through them be and are hereby ordered to suspend all mining activities at Parameter B 16 to 19 and to vacate the same forthwith.
2. The 2nd and 3rd respondents be and are hereby ordered to provide the applicant with protection and ensure that applicant is granted access to its Parameter B16 to B19 mining claims Inyathi. More
In this application, referred to this court pursuant to the provisions of s 175(4) of the Constitution, the applicant seeks the following order:
1. It is declared that the prosecution of the applicant Jabulani Sibanda in respect of his address to war veterans and others at Herbert Mine, Mutasa District, on 27 October 2014 is unlawful in that it is in violation of ss 60 and 61 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
2. No propagation and expression of one’s ideas and opinions should be subjected to prosecution under s 33(2)(b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act.
3. That... More
This is an application for backpay. This hearing is arising from a Supreme Court decision that referred the matter back for determination on the ground that the court as an equity court should not apply strict rules of evidence but should call expert evidence to assist in determining the backpay that should be paid. Previously the court had dismissed the claim as the applicant could not bring evidence to show how his backpay should be determined in view of the changes that the Zimbabwe currency had gone through during the relevant period. More
Both the applicants are former employees of the respondent. Their applications were consolidated with the consent of both parties in terms of Order 13R92 of the High Court Rules, 1979. The two applications were lodged separately and counsel requested the court to consolidate the matters. In considering whether or not a consolidation was warranted the court had Their applications were consolidated with the consent of both parties in terms of Order 13 R92 of the High Court Rules, 1979 regard to the fact that the cause of action arose from the same facts and the issues raised in both application... More
This is a fairly straightforward case which in all fairness could have proceeded as a stated case since there is no dispute on the facts.
The facts which are common cause in this case can be summarised as follows:-
The plaintiff is a farmer operating from farm No. 30 Chipangayi, Chipinge District, Manicaland Province. On 1 November 2007 the plaintiff delivered 65, 413 tonnes of wheat to the defendant’s depot at Middle SabiChipangai as a result of which the two parties entered into an agreement tendered in this court as exh 2. In terms of exh 2 the plaintiff had... More
This is an application to execute an order of this court pending an appeal to the Supreme Court.
It is common cause that in terms of an agreement entered into on 1 November 2007 between the applicant and the respondent the applicant, a farmer at farm No. 30 Chipangayi, Chipinge District in Manicaland Province, would deliver 65,52 tonnes of wheat to the defendant. The purchase price would be paid as follows:-
(a) 50% in Zimbabwe currency amounting to ZW$2 349 958 125-00
(b) 50% in foreign currency amounting to US$ 8 179-63 payable through the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe. More
The allegations, as set out in the Request for Remand Form, are that they criminally abused their duties as public officers as follows. They were members of the City of Harare Tender Evaluation Committee. On a date not material to this judgment, sitting as members of such Committee, they unprocedurally awarded a tender to refurbish street lights in Harare to a company called Juluka Enndo Joint Venture in breach of procurement provisions which required the procurement to be done through a competitive bidding process. Further, they disregarded their earlier decision at a previous sitting of the same City of Harare... More
