This is an application for condonation for late filing an application for review. It is opposed. PRELIMINARY ISSUES
At the commencement of the hearing , preliminary issues were raised on behalf of the 1st respondent . These are that the draft application for review does not comply with rules of this Court ,Statutory Instrument 150/2017( the Rules); that the relief sought is incompetent and further that the review application is premature More
This is a judgment on preliminary issues which were raised on behalf of the 1st respondent where the main matter was an application for review. The following were the preliminary issues. That the application was defective in that it did not comply with the provisions of R20 of the Rules of this Court and Form LC5; that the grounds for review were not concise and precise; issue estoppel/res judicata in that the applicant was raising an appealable matter in an application for review where such matter had been competently dealt with in terms of a code of conduct. The respondent... More
In this contested application, applicant vies for the confirmation of a provisional order whilst the respondents pray for its discharge. Apparently, applicant sought an interim order by way of an urgent chamber application for the suspension of the respondents’ mining activities and operations on Plot G, Greydine Farm, Tiger Reef, Kwekwe. Applicant is the holder of occupation and agricultural rights on the property on one hand. More
This is an application for condonation for late noting of an appeal and an application for rescission. In his draft order the applicant has prayed for condonation only. I will therefore deal with an application for condonation. More
The plaintiff is the owner of Adelina farm in the Featherstone area where he is in the business of raring Brahman cattle since 1999. His claim against the defendant is for the payment of US$9 086 being the balance of the purchase price of 26 steers sold and delivered to the defendant. That claim was eventually reduced to US$8 738 on account of the non delivery of one beast that bolted and escaped during the loading process. More
1. This is an application for bail pending appeal against both conviction and sentence.
2. It was triggered by the judgement of this court convicting them, together with one Terrence Mukupe, of the alternative charge of contravening s 174(1)(e) of the Customs and Excise Act [Chapter 23:02] (“the Customs and Excise Act”) and the sentence imposed on each of them. More
Having received information that the appellant was moving around in possession of a firearm the police went to the appellant’s house to conduct a search. They recovered a 12 bore shot gun and 4 rounds of ammunition from his bedroom. It is common cause that the firearm in question had been fired once. More
This is an application for registration of an arbitral award made by arbitrator N.M. Tichiwangana on 6 February 2012 which award remains extant. The application is opposed by the respondent and the thrust of such opposition is contained in para 4 of the opposing affidavit of Peter Matemba which reads; More
Appellant appealed against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The crux of his case is set out in his Heads of Argument as follows,
“12. The Respondent failed to establish all these essential elements of theft during the hearing much made (sic) and arbitrary decision to dismiss the Appellant. The Labour Act states that an employee can only be dismissed if it is proved in terms of the law that he was engaged in an act of misconduct stipulated in the Employment Code of Conduct (Section 12B of the Act). More
This is an application for condonation for late filing of an application for recession of default judgment and an application for rescission of default judgment. More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The facts of the case are aptly set out in Respondent’s Heads Of Argument as follows,
“On 01 May 2011 however LameckPhiri gave the keys to the safe containing money he had collected on 30 April 2011, to the Appellant who did banking for that day. The Appellant collected a total of
US$98 439 and R193 800. He put the money and banking documents in the same safe that contained Phiri’s money. No hand over take over was ever done between the two notwithstanding that huge sums of... More
This was an urgent chamber application in which the applicant sought an interim order that:
a) The first to third respondents restore the applicant into possession a piece of land referred to as “site Chorlotte at Godevary Farm”.
b) That first to third respondents, their associates, assigns or appointees be interdicted from tiling the soil and or interrupting the supply of water or access to roads leading to the land stated in paragraph (a) herein and
c) That the first to the third respondents be ordered to return all farming implements removed from the pacing shed, storeroom and house used... More
On the 24th of June 2019 the respondents appeared in court represented by legal practitioners. At the end of the hearing the application was struck off in accordance with the admissions made by the parties through their laywers. Unfortunately the order was not typed until a follow up was made a year later on the 7th July 2020. On the 15th July the typed order was availed. More
The plaintiff and the defendant were married in terms of the Marriage Act, Chapter, 5:11 on 15 December, 1990, at Mutare Magistrates Court. Their marriage certificate was produced as Exh 1. When summons for divorce were issued in July, 2015, the parties had been married for 25 years.
They had five children; two adults; one minor child who died in 2017 and two other minor children, namely, Jonathan Chiweda, born 30 September, 2000 and is therefore turning 16 years and Grace Chiweda, born 29 April, 2005, and is therefore 13 years old. More
. This is an application for a declaratur and consequential relief arising out of a sale of property belonging to the applicant.
The applicant is a female adult who can sue in her capacity. The first respondent is a Trust registered in terms of the laws ofZimbabwe. The second respondent is a male adult. The third and fourth respondents are cited in their official capacity. More
