This is an application for condonation of late noting of appeal and extension of time within which to file the appeal in terms of r 31 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1964.
The parties were married but divorced in England. The court in England issued a decree nisi which the first respondent used to obtain an interdict in the local High Court. The interdict barred the applicant from dealing in the property known as No. 5 Reitfontein Close Highlands, Harare, which he claims to be his sole property. More
This was a civil appeal. It was from a decision of the magistrate’s court at Kwekwe, Midlands Province. We dismissed it for lack of merit soon after argument and gave reasons ex tempore. This now is our detailed judgment. More
Four preliminary points were raised for the respondents that the appellants were fugitives from justice they should not be heard, that the grounds of appeal raise procedural issues therefore an application for review should have been made, that the grounds of appeal donot raise questions of law and that the appellant waived their right to appeal. More
The applicant is a Zimbabwean citizen. He seeks a declaration of constitutional invalidity of s 192 (6) of the Electoral Act [Chapter 2:13], on the basis that it violates ss 67 (1) (a), 235 (1)(a), 235 (3) and 134 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. In consequence, he seeks that this Court strike down or expunge the words “approved by the Minister” from the impugned provision. More
“Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt-the law will help the vigilant not the sluggard”. See Ndebele v Ncube . This is an application for rescission of judgment in which the relief sought is the setting aside of the judgment of 21 December 2016, handed down by this court under case number HC11456-16. The application is brought in terms of both r 63 and r 449 of the rules of this court, as well as the common law according to the notice of application filed of record on 26 January 2017. More
The four appellants appeared before the Magistrate at Marondera charged with the crime of stock theft as defined in s 114 (2) (a) (ii) of the Criminal law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9 :23] (the Criminal Code). More
- Appellant was in Respondent’s employ as a Trust Plant Manager at the Graniteside Branch.
- By a letter dated the 16th of May, 2014 he was suspended pending investigations into gross acts of misconduct.
- By a letter dated the 21st May 2014, Appellant was advised of a disciplinary hearing on the 28th May, 2014 at 4 pm. The charge was:
“any act, conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfilment of the express or implied conditions of his contract”
In terms of the National Employment Code of Conduct Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006.
- The said letter stated,
“Please... More
This was an action matter. On the date of trial, it was postponed sine die by consent. The defence had raised a special plea of prescription. The plaintiff was not conceding it. In terms of a timetable agreed upon, the parties would file their written submissions. Judgment on prescription would be delivered on the papers. This now is that judgment. More
: The appellant applied for bail pending trial on 14 September, 2018 and he was denied bail.
He appealed to the High Court against the magistrates’ decision. More
The basis of the charge was that the employees under the national employment council grade had convened a meeting without following the company procedures for holding such a meeting. The appellant was alleged to have approached physically and by telephone some employees and called them to attend the meeting. He threatened some of the employees that if they did not attend they will be labeled as sellouts. He is a managerial employee and he attended and even addressed the meeting on his personal issues. The appellant was initially charged not as a manager to which he successfully objected hence the... More
1. This is an appeal against the decision of the designated authority upholding the decision of the disciplinary committee. The appeal raised three grounds on conviction and two on the penalty. However in court it was agreed that there was only one ground on the conviction which is that there was no adequate evidence to convict on the charges raised. On the penalty it was agreed that if the charge was proved the penalty would be appropriate going by precedent of such cases as Innscor v Letron Chimoto SC 6/2012. The parties thus argued on the sufficiency of the evidence... More
This is an appeal against the decision that led to appellant’s dismissal from employment following allegations that he had given false information relating to duplicated bar code 106 which could have resulted in loss of the company’s roll of electric cable. More
This application was filed through an urgent chamber book. The circumstances were that sometime in December 2016 the applicant’s son who is a form four pupil with the first respondent was alleged to have committed some acts of misconduct which were inter alia theft of a text book and $21-00 from a fellow student. More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of heads of argument.
The brief history of this matter is that respondent filed its appeal on the 16September 2011. Applicant then filed his notice of response on the
30 September 2011. The respondent then filed its heads of argument on the
7 June 2013. The matter failed to take off on the 11 December 2012 because respondent had not filed heads of argument. On the 11 June 2013 the matter was then postponed sine die to enable applicant’s legal practitioner to file heads of argument. On the 28 June 2013... More
