This is an application for confirmation of a ruling made by the applicant in a matter between the respondent and its former employee, one Tendai Fortune Chiremba (hereinafter referred to as the claimant.) More
The 2nd Respondent was employed by the 1st Respondent on a fixed term contract for 5 years as a public safety director.
When the parties entered into this fixed term contract, the 2nd Respondent worked for only 27.5 months and the employer terminated the contract. The agreement was that the 2nd Respondent was engaged for a fixed period of 5 years. More
On the 28th May 2019 applicant issued a ruling to the effect that:-
(i) the retrenchment procedure was properly adhered to;
(ii) there was variation of provisions of the contract of employment;
(iii) the respondent be ordered to pay a total amount of $63 621 within 30 days of receipt of the ruling;
(iv) the respondent remit an amount of $7 653.56 to the Pension Authority within 90 days of receipt of the ruling.
It is this ruling which is subject of this application for confirmation pursuant to Section 93(5a) and (5b) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] as amended.... More
On the 1st April 2019 at Harare Applicant, in her capacity as a Labour Officer, issued a ruling. She ordered the 1st Respondent (employer) to pay the 2nd Respondent (employee) an amount of $3 382-50 in respect of gratuity upon termination of employment. Apparently the employer failed to comply with the ruling. Thereupon Applicant applied to this Court for the confirmation of her ruling in terms of section 93 (5a) of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 (hereafter called the Act). The employee supported the application. The employer opposed the application. More
This is a chamber application for an order for direct access to the Constitutional Court (“the Court”) made in terms of r 21(2) of the Constitutional Court Rules SI 61/2016 (“the Rules”). More
The application is opposed by the second respondent. The first respondent is the presiding magistrate whose decision is the subject matter of the review application pending before this court under case no. HC 2653/18. The first respondent is not really a player in this application because she made her decision, the subject of review and became functus officio. To put the matter beyond doubt, the applicant appeared before the first applicant at Harare Magistrates court on 17 February, 2018 charged with the offence of Criminal Abuse of Duty as a Public Officer as defined in section 174 (1) (a) of... More
The brief history of this matter is that the Appellant joined the Respondent in August 1994 as a general hand. He was charged with two (2) counts of fraud that is contravening Clause 11:5 (f) of SI 171 of 2010 Collective Bargaining Agreement. More
This is an application for the condonation of late noting of an appeal and extension of time within which to note the appeal. The respondent employer is opposed to the grant of condonation relief citing the fact that such is not well founded. More
This is an urgent chamber application for a spoliation order which was initially lodged against the first to third respondents before the fourth respondent was joined to the proceedings in terms of Rule 32(12) (b) of the High Court Rules, 2021.
The third respondent abandoned the points in limine raised in its papers of opposition. I will therefore go into the merits of the matter. The applicant’s case is that he bought two pieces of land from Hayes Zimbabwe Private Limited and Rawson Properties on 18 June 2020, being stands 18017 and 18018 Tynwald Township of lot 12 Tynwald. After... More
The Appellant was summarily dismissed in August 2010 in contravention of Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 which applies to employers and employees without registered Codes of Conduct. He took his case to arbitration and on the hearing date the respondent did not turn up. The Arbitrator ruled in his favour but when it came to the award, she only granted the Appellant leave pay, notice pay and arrears for underpayments. She did not award him anything as damages for wrongful dismissal; neither did she award him any back pay from the date of the unlawful dismissal to the date of... More
The historical narrative is that, the first and third applicants are brothers borne of the same father, whilst the second is a wife to their late brother. The dispute revolves around their stay and occupation of a once family property, farm 27 Chitomborwizi East, Chinhoyi. The farm is said to have originated from their biological father Johannes Ngandu Chiguvare who was the original occupier or acquirer in the late 1940s. Somehow, their late father is said to have donated his rights and interests in the said farm to one of his sons, a brother to the two applicants, Antonio Mapfumo... More
On the 6th of April 2021, the plaintiff caused a summons to be issued from this Court praying for a decree of divorce, and sharing of marital property. Maintenance was to continue being regulated by the extant order of the Kwekwe maintenance court. The defendant entered an appearance to defend and the matter progressed to trial leading to this judgment. More
This is an application for bail pending trial. Applicant is facing one count of possession of raw ivory without a permit in contravention of section 82(1) of the Parks and Wildlife Regulations SI 362/1998 as readwith section 128 (1) (8) of the Parks and Wildlife Act (Chapter 20:14), and a further count of possession of a firearm without a licence in violation of section 4(1) of the Firearms Act (Chapter 10:09). The applicant denies the allegations and avers that he has been wrongly implicated. The application for bail is opposed by the state on the grounds that there is overwhelming... More
This is a court application for leave to execute an order of this court in case number HC 5622/19 pending appeal.
The application is opposed by the respondents.
On 17 January 2020 the applicant obtained an order against the respondents in case number HC 5622/19 in the following terms;
“that;
1. The respondents return and deliver a new Terex J1160 Mobile Crushing Plant to the applicant within 7 (seven) days from the date of granting of this order.
2. Failure of which the Sheriff is hereby authorized to take all reasonable steps to ensure that the respondents complies with this... More
This is an application for an order of rei-vindicatio and alternative relief. I granted the relief sought in the main. The applicants draft order was worded as follows:
1. The respondents return and deliver the applicant’s Terex J1160 Crushing Plant to the applicant within 7 (seven) days from the date of granting of this order.
2. In the event that the plant is not delivered as aforesaid, the Sheriff is authorised to take all reasonable steps to ensure that the respondents comply with this order.
3. The respondents are jointly and severally liable for applicant’s costs on the ordinary scale. More
