Applicant and respondent are husband and wife having married in terms of the Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11] on 27 September 1997. The marriage was blessed with two children who are now adults. During the subsistence of the marriage, they acquired a property known as Lot 4 of Chimwemwe of subdivision A Kingsmead of Borrowdale Estate measuring 4212 square metres ( the property). Applicant says the property was acquired by his optional shares from his previous employment. The property was subdivided and stand 916 Borrowdale Township of Lot 4 of Chimwemwe of Subdivision A of Kingsmead Extension of Borrowdale Estate measuring... More
This is an appeal against both conviction and sentence. Appellant was convicted of theft of a motor vehicle in contravention of section 113 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23], following a full trial after pleading not guilty. He was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment, with 12 months suspended for 5 years, on condition that, he does not commit similar offences involving dishonesty and theft, upon which if convicted will be sentenced to an imprisonment term without an option of a fine. An effective 24 months jail term remained. More
This is an application for rescission of a judgment entered by consent of both parties on the 1st of October 2012.
After the consent judgment was entered Respondent was reinstated and was to be paid some stated monies as damages. However on the 21st of November 2012 Respondent resigned from Applicant’s employ. Respondent stated the reason for his resignation as that he was running a casino which he had been running since his dismissal. Upon receipt of the resignation letter Applicant was of the view that the reason for resignation showed that Respondent had found alternative employment. Therefore he was... More
This matter was set down in terms of rule 19(3) (a) of the Labour Court Rules. Appellant had filed heads of argument at the time of hearing. Counsel for Appellant applied for condonation for late filing of such heads. Respondent did not oppose the application. Respondent had also filed his heads on the date of hearing. Both parties consented to having the matter heard on the merits. They indicated they were prepared to argue the matter. I decided to hear the matter on the merits. More
This case raises the preliminarypoint as to whetherthe HighCourt has power to review decisionsofaLabourCourt.It wasarguedin limine that the HighCourtdoesnothavejurisdiction toreviewlabourmatters. Thereasoningwas thatsince boththeHigh Court and the LabourCourthave the samepowersof reviewin labour matters,thisputs themat par. The first respondent argued that the applicant should have approached the Supreme Court on appeal sincethat court could have exercised its review powers in hearing the matter in terms of s 25 of the Supreme Court Act [Chapter7:13]. More
DUBE-BANDA J: This is an application by the defendants for absolution from the instance at the close of the plaintiff’s case. In this case, plaintiff sued out a summons against the defendants, praying for judgment in the following terms:-
1. Damages in the sum of $20 000.00; arising out of the arbitrary violation of the plaintiff’s right to privacy and dignity; and failure of the Police Service to diligently perform their constitutional obligations.
2. For the payment of the claim, the defendants are jointly and severally liable for the claim one paying the others to be absolved.
3. Payment of... More
The applicants are employees of the Public Service Commission (PSC) employed as either law officers or public prosecutors and assigned to the prosecution department of the Attorney-General’s Office. The applicants are also executive committee members of the Zimbabwe Law Officers Association (ZILOA), whose membership at a meeting held on 18 September 2011 resolved to embark on a work stoppage from 4 October, 2011 if certain grievances were not met by the PSC. The work stoppage did take place as resolved, and some of the applicants, as spokespersons of the association, gave media interviews on behalf of their membership during the... More
This case seems to epitomize the extent to which an employer can go in a bid to prevent payment of what is due and owing to a hapless employee. In order to ensure capitulation the employers’s entire machinery i.e. legal, financial and human resources is unleashed on the bemused employee, contrary to the supposed benign nature of human kind. Perhaps, this is what Capitalism or malignancy is all about, but is the defendant not a public entity not solely run for profit? One wonders. More
On the 25 of October, I handed down an ex tempore ruling in which I dismissed the applicants’ claim. At that point, the applicants were represented by James Majatame Attorneys At Law. It appears that the applicants have now secured representation from Mugiya and Muvhami Law Chambers who have written requesting an upliftment of the judgment. This is a curious fact as Mugiya and Muvhami Law Chambers were representing the first respondent at the time the matter was heard before me, as evident from the record. It is improper for Mugiya and Muvhami Law Chambers to switch camp at this... More
The two applicants are sister companies. In fact the second applicant is a management vehicle of the first applicant and they are represented by Michael Fowler who doubles up as a director of both of them. He has deposed to the founding affidavit in support of this summary judgment application on behalf of both of them. They seek an order for the eviction of the first respondent, a mining cooperative currently in occupation of and mining gold claims registration numbers 12731G, 12734G and 21715 BN situated in Chegutu, from those mining claims. The application is opposed by the first respondent... More
The following are the grounds of appeal and I quote:
1. ‘The Tribunal a quo erred and misdirected itself on a point of law in failing to appreciate that the essential elements of the offence of embezzlement had not been proven. More
KABASA J: On 5th March 2020 the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant claiming the following: -
“1. An order compelling the defendant to transfer the property being Stand Number 177 Harrisvale Bulawayo to the Estate of the Late Patrick Hove.
2. The defendant to pay the costs of suit.”
The background to the claim is largely common cause. It is this: -
On 25th June 2013 the late Patrick Hove, “Hove” entered into an Agreement of Sale with the defendant for the purchase of stand number 177 John Makunga Township of Lot 1 of Hundred Acre Lot John Makunga... More
On the 13th July 2020 this court handed down an order dismissing the appeal filed in this matter. The appeal was against an arbitral award handed down on 26th of August, 2014in which Hon H.T. Pasipanodya found that the Appellant’s claim for unlawful dismissal was not justified and therefore the dismissal penalty had been properly imposed. The appeal was opposed. I apologise sincerely to the parties for the delay in writing the judgement. I fell ill in 2017 and delayed in the delivery of many judgements this one included. The following constitute my reasons for the judgement in the matter. More
The matter was placed before me as one for quantification of damages pursuant to an order by the Labour Court granted on 20 January, 2006 the operative part of which reads as follows;
In the result the appeal is dismissed the decision appealed against is hereby confirmed. Save to add that should reinstatement no longer be an option, CABS is ordered to pay Rugwete her back pay and benefits with interest plus damages for loss of employment. Should the parties fail to agree on the damages payable, either party can approach this court for quantification More
