This is an application for confirmation of a ruling made by the Applicant in his capacity as Designated Agent for the National Employment Council for Welfare and Educational Institutions on (hereafter referred to as NEC) (date). The application is premised on Section 93(5a) (b) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01] as amended by the Labour Amendment Act No. 5 of 2015. The Application is opposed by 1st Respondent and partially supported by the 2nd Respondent. More
Appellants appealed to this Court against their dismissal from employment by Respondent. Their attorney amended the grounds by deleting some and hearing two namely,
1. Respondent erred by substituting the penalty of a final warning with dismissal; and
2. Respondent erred in dismissing some employees whilst warning others for the same offence. More
The applicant is a Chief Mining Engineer and Shareholder in 2nd respondent, which is a mining entity under judicial management. He seeks a prohibitory interdict, which is specific to the 1st respondent. The applicant claims to have founded the 2nd respondent in 2003. 2nd respondent specializes in gold mining and processing. 1st respondent is a legal practitioner, and the judicial manager of the 2nd respondent. He has some financial interest in the 2nd respondent having made significant financial investment in that entity. The arrangement was that applicant and 1st respondent would get shareholding in 2nd respondent, commensurate with their investment.... More
In this matter the applicant was sued by the respondent for adultery damages in the sum of $25 000.00 being $12 500.00 for contumelia and $12 500.00 for loss of comfort solicity and services of the spouse i.e. loss of consortium. The applicant on being served with the summons and declaration duly entered appearance to defend and filed his plea under case No. HC 4093/16. More
Before me is an application for review of the decision of the Negotiating Committee of the National Employment Council for the Commercial Sectors. More
The first and second applicants are elected councilors for Wards 17 and 24 forHarare and Bulawayo City Councils respectively. They were elected into office in July 2018 on tickets of a political party called the People’s Democratic Party(PDP)which contested the elections under a coalition of political parties going by the moniker MDC-A.First applicant is also the mayor of Harare. More
The applicant was a councilor for Mt Pleasant and also a mayor of Harare City council. The allegations where that the applicant in the period between 1 March 2020 and 31 March 2020 asked one Addmore Nhekairo who was the Director of Housing, to allocate residential stands to Rotina Mafume his sister and Rutendo Muvuti a work colleague at Mafume Law Chambers. It was further alleged that at the time this request came, the interviews for Westlea stands had already closed and the two beneficiaries were not on the waiting list therefore did not have waiting list numbers. The applicant... More
This is an appeal made in terms of s 121 (1) of the Criminal Procedure & Evidence Act [Chapter 9:23] (“the CPEA”) as read with r 6 (1) of the High Court of Zimbabwe Bail Rules, 1971, pursuant to the Magistrates Court’s dismissal of the appellant’s application for bail pending trial. More
The appellant was convicted by the Magistrates Court of Culpable Homicide in terms of s 49 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reformation Act [Chapter 9:23]. More
This is an application for bail pending appeal against sentence only. The applicant was convicted on two counts of stock theft as defined in s 114 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification And Reform) Act [Cap 9.23]. He pleaded guilty to both counts and was sentenced to 9 years imprisonment on each count on 10 September 2007 and is serving an effective sentence of 18 years imprisonment. The applicant successfully applied for condonation of late noting of his appeal which was granted by ORMAJEE J on 23 March 2011 in case No. 1410/09. He has since filed his appeal... More
Appellant was in Respondent’s employment as from the 2nd February, 2002 to the 29th October, 2012 when he tendered his resignation. This is common cause. More
On 2 September 2020, the applicant was granted bail by this court on appeal against the refusal by the Magistrate Court to admit him to bail on a charge of incitement to commit public violence as defined in s 187 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act [Chapter 9:23] as read with s 36 (1) (a) of the same Act. He was charged in the alternative with two related charges arising from the same course of conduct. I have noted that the bail order indicates that it is myself who granted the applicant bail. The order needs... More
The second respondent approached the court seeking a declaratory order and the application was dismissed. On appeal the Supreme Court remitted the matter to the court a quo for it to issue a full judgment incorporating the counter application that was before it which sought declaration of rights for the Estate of the Late Rabson Mutuna Nyakudya in relation to stand TT23204 measuring 840 square meters inclusive of Nyakudya Grinding Mill.The applicant also seeks cession of the said immovable property to the beneficiaries of the deceased Estate of the late Rabson Mutuna. More
“In so far as Applicant is concerned there were two matters in dispute which required evidence to be led. The first is whether or not Applicant was properly before the Arbitration, Tribunal, Applicant contended that he was unaware of the dispute until he was summoned to appear before the arbitrator and that he had not received any invitation to attend any conciliation exercise before either the Ministry of Labour or the Industrial Council. The second issue is whether or not he was an “employer”as defined in the (sic) Labour Relations Act. It is Appellant’s position that no evidence at all... More
MUZOFA, J:
The two appellants were employed on fixed term contract in different capacities by the respondent. Upon termination of their contracts a dispute arose in the computation of their terminal benefits.
The appellants referred the dispute to a labour officer and subsequently the matter went before an arbitrator. The arbitrator after considering the evidence before him, the first respondent was awarded a total sum of $718.45 and second respondent $790.93.
Both have appealed.
The grounds of appeal impugn the arbitrator’s findings in respect of cash in lieu of leave and overtime payment. More
