Respondent was in the employ of the appellant as chemicals handler. It is alleged that he took some chemical with the intention of taking out of the company premises. When he discovered that he could not possibly succeed in this endeavour, it is alleged that he spilt the chemical into a hedge close by and approached the security check-point with the empty container which he alleged he wanted to use to collect some water. The respondent was brought before a disciplinary committee which found him guilty and recommended his dismissal. The respondent took his matter to the Labour Officer and... More
The present appeal seeks to determine whether the correct classification of goods for customs purposes was applied in terms of s 87 (3) of the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23:02] and s 18 of the Fiscal Appeals Court Act. More
The facts of this matter are common cause. It is not in dispute that on 21 July 2006 at about 11.00 am, the plaintiff was arrested and picked up by two uniformed members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police from his workplace at TPT Transport and Equipment Company in Ardbennie, Harare. He was picked up together with his workmate, one Clement Marioni. They were taken to Southerton Police Station. Upon request by him, the police advised him that he was being treated as a suspect in a case of theft of batteries which had occurred at his workplace. He was only... More
Mr A A Makore who appeared for the respondent indicated that he was no longer representing the respondent and that he had merely attended court out of courtesy and to advise court of his position. He also had not filed a formal notice of renunciation of agency. In any case even if he had hoped to represent the respondent, he was barred by virtue of not having filed heads of arguments in terms of the High Court Rules, 1971 More
: This is an application in which the applicant seeks a provisional order on the following terms – the interim relief as sought reads:
“That pending the determination of this matter the applicants are granted the following relief:
(a) The first respondent is barred from holding out as a holder of a 50% undivided share in a certain piece of land in Hartley called Swallow field of Johannesburg measuring 127.6238 hectares held under deed of transfer number DT 5157/99 pending the return date and finalisation of this matter.
(b) The first respondent is barred from unilaterally dealing in a certain... More
The three applicants in this urgent chamber application applied for a provisional order the terms of the interim relief of which reads as follows- Interim Relief.
That pending the confirmation or discharge of this Provisional Order the applicants are granted the following relief:
1) That first to third respondents is (sic) directed to stop advertising for sale of any stands on a certain piece of land in Hartely called Swallowfield of Johannesburg measuring 127,6238 hectares held under deed of transfer number DT 5157/99.
2) The first to third respondents be directed to refrain from collecting sale proceeds of stands. More
This is an application for quantification of damages. The application which has been filed in terms of Rule 14 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017 is filed pursuant to a court order issued in this court under reference LC/H/444/22 on 7th July,2022. In the order the court directed as follows;
“1. The application for review be and is hereby granted.
2. The 2nd Respondent’s Ruling dated 28 January 2022 purporting to convict and dismiss 1st Applicant from employ of the 1st Respondent be and is hereby set aside.
3. The 2nd Respondent’s Ruling dated 28th January 2022 purporting to convict... More
This is an application for bail pending trial. The applicants allege that there are changed circumstances, which if properly considered, would entitle them to bail pending trial. On the 10th February 2019 an application for bail pending trial was brought before me by the applicants and their co-accused. I declined the application and gave my reasons in judgment HB-04-19. I am informed that an appeal has been lodged to the Supreme Court against that judgment. More
This is an application for absolution from the instance.
Tendai Madungwe (hereinafter called the deceased) died from injuries sustained in a bus accident that occurred at the 257 kilometer peg along Harare Chirundu Road. She is at the centre of this trial. First Plaintiff is deceased’s husband while second to sixth Plaintiff are children born of deceased and first Plaintiff. Defendant is a bus company which owns the bus which was involved in an accident that resulted in deceased’s death.
Two issues were referred for trial namely:
1. Whether or not defendant’s driver negligently caused the accident
2. Whether or... More
I dealt with this matter in chambers and dismissed the application on 30th of September 2015. The reason was that the appeal had no prospects of success.
Applicant has requested for detailed reasons and here are they.
The applicant filed a notice of appeal which espoused the following grounds.
1. It is respectfully submitted that applicant filed his appeal within the stipulated regulatory period, however prison authorities responsible for the conveying of the papers delayed the process. There are no issues with the reasons for the delay.
2. It is respectfully submitted that applicant’s conviction in the court a quo... More
The appellant, a seventy-year old man, was convicted of rape as defined in s 65(1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act, [Cap 9:23] after a trial. He was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment of which 7years were suspended on conditions of good behaviour. The appellant was convicted on the following facts found to have been proved in the court a quo. The complainant was aged 11 years at the time of the alleged offence. She was staying with the appellant who is married to her aunt. On an unknown date in December 1998 her aunt left her together... More
This is an application for the confirmation of a provisional order granted by this court on 4May 2022 for the provisional liquidation of the first respondent MANGENJE BROTHERS (PRIVATE) LTD. More
This is an application in terms of s 5(1)(b)(iii) of the Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07], (hereinafter called “the Act”) for the liquidation of the first respondent on the basis that it is just and equitable to wind it up. The applicant avers that there is a deadlock between its members and directors. In addition, it is submitted that the forth respondent is dissipating the company’s assets, as well as selling assets in its name, thereby creating obligations which the company is unable to fulfill. It has been brought by the executor of the estate of the late Isaiah Mudzengi, who... More
This application was filed in terms of section 5(1)(b)(iii) of the Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07] (“the Act”), for the liquidation of Greynut Investments (Pvt) Ltd (“the first respondent”) on the basis that it is just and equitable to wind it up. It was brought by the executor of the estate of the late Isaiah Mudzengi, who held 70% shares in the first respondent. The application is opposed by the fourth and fifth respondents. In her opposition, the fourth respondent states that she the Chief Executive Officer and co-director of the first respondent, and that she has a shareholding of 30%.... More
