: The applicant instituted summons action against the respondent seeking judgment in the sum of US$51 013-00 together with interest at the rate of 5% per annum from 31 July 2011 to date of payment and costs of suit, due by the respondent in terms of an acknowledgment of debt signed on 28 July 2011. More
This is an application brought in terms of s 167(2)(d) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, as read with rr 21(1)(d) and 27(1) of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016, for a declaration that the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe, the first respondent herein, failed to fulfil the constitutional obligation imposed upon him by s 259(3) as read with s 180 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe when he appointed the fifth respondent as the Prosecutor-General of Zimbabwe. All the respondents have opposed the application for various reasons which will be articulated in the course of this judgment. More
The accused appeared before the provincial magistrate at Harare Magistrate court on 8 April, 2021 on trial on four counts of theft as defined in s 113(3)(a)(b) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] committed at four different residential properties in Hatfield suburb, Harare between the period of October and December 2020. In count one, the accused had been given a place to stay by the complainant at the latter’s house. The accused abused the complainants’ kindness and stole the complainants’ Samsung phone and three pairs of shoes from the complainants’ house. The property was not recovered. More
Applicants applied to this Court for quantification of damages for loss of employment. 1st Respondent opposed the appeal.
The matter arises from the order issued by this Court on 24th October 2022. The order nullified the dismissal from of employment of applicants (employees) by the 1st respondent (employer) and remitted the matter to the employer for a rehearing within thirty (30) days. If the employer did not comply, it was ordered to reinstate the employees or pay them damages either agreed by the parties or assessed by this Court. More
The appellant was employed by the respondent as its Operations Director. He was also, for a period, appointed as the organisation’s Acting Managing Director. He was dismissed from the respondent’s employ following disciplinary proceedings for acts of misconduct which happened during the period that he was Acting Managing Director. He was charged with three counts for violating section 4 (a) of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct), Regulations Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 (S.I. 15/06), that is
“any act of conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfilment of the express or implied conditions of his or her contract;” More
This is an application for review. Before the matter proceeded on merits four points in limine were raised. On the basis of the points in limine this court dismissed the application. More
The applicant was employed as a Finance Manager and Director for 18 years. He was charged with Misconduct and was dismissed from employment in February 2013. He appealed against the dismissal and Honourable arbitrator W T Pasipanodya ruled in his favour. The applicant then appeared before Honourable TC Sengwe for quantification of damages. More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Magistrates Court sitting at Murambinda.
The respondent in this appeal was the applicant while the appellants were the respondents in the court a quo.
The respondent filed an application for an interdict against the appellants More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The judgment sought to be appealed against was handed down on the 30th of October,2015.
After listening to arguments and upon consideration of the papers in the record I am
satisfied that the application for leave to appeal ought to be dismissed.
My reasons are basically as follows:
Firstly, the Applicant has failed to comply with the accepted practice that in an
application for leave to appeal an Applicant must attach the proposed Notice of Appeal
setting out the grounds on which he/she proposes to appeal. There are... More
On 31 January 2011 the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant for the following relief:-
“(a) eviction of the defendant and all those claiming right of occupation through her from Stand No. 1091 Joshua Nkomo Housing Co-operative.
(b) An order authorising the plaintiff to allocate Stand 1090 to another paid up member.
(c) Costs of suit”. More
It is apparent from the number of reference cases in the official heading of this matter that the parties have been at each other in the courts on a number of occasions. More
This was an application for bail pending appeal. It was opposed. I dismissed it soon after argument and gave reasons ex tempore. The applicants say they want to appeal. So they have asked for written reasons. Here they are. More
This is an urgent chamber application wherein the applicant seeks the following interim relief:-
“Pending the determination of applicant’s applications for review filed under cover of case numbers HCR 1141/20 and HCR 1423/20, proceedings in the case under cover of case number CRB BYO R 83/20 be and are hereby stayed.
In the event that the interim relief is granted, the final order sought is:-
“ Applicant’s case, proceeding under cover of case number CRB BYO R 83/20 having been reviewed and set aside in HC 1423/20, proceedings in CRB BYO R 83/20 be and are hereby permanently stayed.” More
The appellant was employed by the respondent based in Bulawayo. He was dismissed from employment for being absent without authority and dishonesty. More
