On 18 September 2013 first respondent brought an against second respondent seeking second respondent’s eviction from a piece of land situated at Sereko Village, Ward 25, Tombo 2, Nyanga. The basis for such eviction was that she was the owner of that land having inherited it from her late father-in-law in 2007. Second respondent had at one time been leasing the same piece of land from first respondent’s father in law.
Second respondent defended the action arguing that first respondent had no locus standi to sue her for she did not own the land. Second respondent claimed that she was... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The appellant was employed by the respondent as a forecourt cashier from December 2012. He was earning a salary of $250.00 per month. The respondent alleges that the service station at which the appellant was employed closed in December 2013. The appellant then lodged a complaint with the NEC for the Motor Industry on 19 February 2014 alleging non-payment of salaries, overtime and underpayments. Failing settlement at conciliation level, the matter was referred to arbitration. More
This is a ruling on the preliminary issues raised by the parties. Applicant raised the point that the deponent to the Opposing Affidavit had not shown that he was duly authorised. In response Respondent’s legal practitioner stated that the Deponent was not initiating the application but merely acting as a witness. It was also averred that Applicant had not raised this issue in previous proceedings beginning with the Disciplinary proceedings which were initiated by the Deponent. More
Applicant was employed by the Respondent as an Engineering Manager. Respondent, initially dismissed Applicant from employment and he approached the Labour Officer. Parties agreed that the purported dismissal was un-procedural and the Labour Officer ordered Applicant’s immediate reinstatement, that is, with effect from 12 May 2023. Respondent proceeded to charge the Applicant with misconduct and a Disciplinary Hearing was set for 30 May 2023. Applicant attended the hearing with his legal practitioners. Applicant’s legal practitioners raised certain preliminary points before the Disciplinary Committee. More
At the center of the dispute of the applicant and the first respondent (“the parties”) is a piece of land which is situated in the district of Salisbury called Stand 223, Marimba Park Township, Marimba Park, Harare (“the property”). It is 2011 square meters in extent. It is held under Deed of Transfer 3607/21. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent’s appeals committee to dismiss the appellants. The first appellant was employed by the respondent as a buyer whilst the second appellant was employed as a stores controller. On 18 March 2016 the appellants faced allegations of breaching the respondent’s code of conduct. More
The adage, “rest in peace”, expressed as R.I.P is often used when a loved one passes on. I have often wondered whether it is always appropriate in all instances given the nature of disputes that will be simmering during the life time of the deceased which often turn into an all-out-battle after death. In the process, estates are not finalised in the expected six months period. As a matter of fact, some estates take years to be finalised as in this present matter in which the deceased passed away on the 21st of March 2001. Letters of administration were issued... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award, the grounds of appeal being that:-
- the Arbitrator erred in law
- in holding the appellant committed an unfair labour practice by terminating respondents’ contracts of employment.
- Ordering appellant to reimburse respondents’ money deducted for training when there was no basis at law for such a finding. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court dated 31 August 2016 dismissing an application wherein the following relief was sought:
“1.The respondent be and is hereby ordered and directed to surrender to the applicant within five (5) days of the granting of this Order the Share Certificates in respect of the 37 233 118 NICOZ Diamond Insurance Limited shares held by Certificate number 37315 by the Applicant.
2. In the event that the respondent concluded the sale of the shares to any third party, the sale transaction relating thereto be and is hereby set aside... More
The brief facts are that the Respondents are employees of the Appellant. The Appellant did not pay Respondents 2010 bonuses. The matter was referred for conciliation and subsequently for arbitration. The Arbitrator found that the Appellant had failed to follow the correct procedures in advising its employees of its inability to pay the 2010 bonuses. The Arbitrator also found that the Appellant was at law enjoined to make full disclosure of its financial position during the discussions with the Respondents and before the Arbitrator. It failed to do so. The Arbitrator ordered the Appellant to pay the 2010 bonuses. Aggrieved... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Arbitrator who made an order in favour of the employee against the now Appellant Company.
The brief facts of the case are that the Respondent took up issue with the Appellant Company over his employment status and benefits which were due to him. When the Appellant Company failed to resolve the issue in question within the prescribed time limits Respondent approached a Labour Officer for conciliation. This failed and the matter ended up at the Arbitrator’s desk. More
Respondent was in the employ of the Appellant as a Production Manager before being elevated to the position of Acting Divisional Manager. Respondent was subsequently re-appointed to Production Manager which resulted in matter being referred to conciliation. Conciliation failed and the matter was referred to arbitrator. The Arbitrator found in favour of Respondent. More
First and second respondents made a court application in the Magistrates Court, seeking an interdict to bar applicant from cutting or removing timber from a woodlot allegedly belonging to first and second respondent. Applicant averred that the woodlot is situated within its demarcated area leased to it by Forestry Commission.
The court a quo concluded that there were material disputes of fact and ordered that the matter be referred to trial and that papers filed by the parties constitute the pleadings. Applicant was dissatisfied by the magistrate’s ruling and brought this application. Applicant contends that the decision of the court... More
