This application was referred to this Court by the court a quo in terms of s 24(2) of the old Constitution of Zimbabwe (hereinafter referred to as “the Constitution”). More
This is an appeal against part of the judgment of the High Court sitting at Bulawayo, dated 2 May 2019.
The court a quo granted the following order:
1. That the purported Deed of Sale concluded by the parties on 26 January 2010, in respect of a portion of Umguza 100 Acre Lot 5A be and is hereby confirmed to be null and void for want of compliance with the mandatory provisions of the Regional, Town and Country Planning Act [Chapter 29:12]. More
In our respectful view this is a hopeless appeal by all accounts.
After hearing counsel on 26 September 2018 we dismissed this appeal for lack of merit. We gave detailed ex tempore reasons. On 1 October 2018 counsel for the appellant requested written reasons for dismissing the appeal. These are they; More
The proceedings in this matter were first placed before me on review in July, 2020 whereupon I gave a direction that the record be transcribed as I could not make out the magistrates handwriting, much as I tried to. It took nearly 5 months for the transcribed record to be forwarded back to the Registrar. The accused had already served the sentence imposed on him. This is one of the unsatisfactory consequences of the late compliance with the transcription directions. In regard to ineligible handwritings, we are all gifted differently in the art of handwriting. What is important is to... More
The plaintiff and defendant were joined in holy matrimony on 13 June 1997, in terms of the Marriages Act, [Cap 5:11]. The marriage still subsists. They had however commenced living together as husband and wife in terms of customary law in August 1985. Their marriage was blessed with two children one born on 31 March 1989 and the other born on 17 August 1994. More
: This matter was placed before me as an urgent chamber application.
The applicants seek an order as couched below:-
“TERMS OF THE FINAL RELIEF
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
The Provisional order be and is hereby confirmed.
The respondent shall pay applicants’ cost of suit on the legal practitioner and client scale More
On 22 April 2015, the plaintiff issued summons out of this court seeking the following order against the defendant:An order confirming null and void the purported agreement of sale signed by the plaintiff and defendant on the 12th January 2010 in respect of Umguza 100 acre Lot 5A for want of a subdivisions permit at the material time and in any event and in the alternative for defendant’s breach of the terms and conditions of the agreement of sale.
2) An order for the eviction of the defendant and all those claiming rights after him from Umguza 100 Acre Lot... More
This is an appeal against part of the judgment of the High Court of Zimbabwe sitting at Harare, handed down on 25 July 2018. The part of the judgement appealed against is the one ordering the appellant to demolish the brick and mortar wall which it erected around a complex at Budiriro Township, Harare. More
On 2 June 2022 I granted an absolution from the instance at the close of the plaintiff’s case. The full reasons for the ruling were given extempore. The plaintiff has appealed against the decision and has asked for written reasons, More
On 5 April 2022 the registrar of this court drew my attention to the letter which Messrs Chimwamurombe Legal Practice wrote to him. The letter relates to this case, among others. The relevant part of the same is contained in its second paragraph. The paragraph which refers to the letter which the same firm of legal practitioners wrote to the registrar on 24 March 2022 reads, in the part, as follows:-
“in the above stated letter, we requested your offices to include the judgment of Justice Mangota under HC 11839/18 in the appeal record. On the 25 March 2022 your... More
On 15 March 2012 this court issued a Provisional Order whose terms were as follows:
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:-
1. Why Respondents should not lease one Isuzu vehicle registration AAP 0463 to applicant forthwith as per written agreement.
2. Costs incurred in recovering the said vehicle shall be borne by Respondent.
3. The costs of this application to be borne by the Respondent. More
1. This is an appeal against the entire judgment of the Labour Court (“the court a quo”), sitting at Harare, wherein it dismissed the appellant’s appeal and upheld the decision of the respondent’s disciplinary authority dismissing the appellant from employment. More
This judgment only addresses the point in limine which was raised by the respondent employer. The point was to the effect that there is no respondent in the matter. This is so since applicant employee cited the respondent irregularly by mixing its name together with that of the holding company in the same pleadings. More
1.This is an appeal against the appellant’s dismissal from the respondent’s employ.
2. The appellant was employed by the respondent company as its Deputy General Manager. He
was answerable to the General Manager. The pertinent portion of the contract of employment
(P 40) between him and the respondent with respect to his duties provides as follows;
“1. Duties and Responsibilities.
Reporting to the General Manager you will be responsible for the general supervision and management services, plant operation and maintenance. Substantive responsibilities will encompass the following:
(i) – xvii
xviii Any other duties and responsibilities that may be allocated to... More
