This is an urgent application for stay of execution of a decision made against the applicant by the respondent wherein the respondent demoted the applicant . The application is opposed. This is not the first time that the applicant has approached this Court with a similar application. In January 2024 the applicant appeared before this Court ( Honourable Musariri J). Judgment in that matter, LC/H/2/24 ,was issued on 15th January 2024.The Court in the earlier application dismissed it on the basis that the applicant failed to show that he would suffer irreparable damage should the demotion not be stayed pending... More
As parents tussle over custody of children they seem to be oblivious that the best interests of the children reign supreme over the parents’ preferences. This court as the upper guardian of children will ensure that the duty placed upon it by the Constitution of Zimbabwe, and indeed the dictates of regional conventions such as the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child and international instruments such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, being to safeguard the best interests of the children shall be undertaken without hesitation. Children are not chattels to... More
Whatthe applicant LloydMadyegasva hereinseeks, isan order to the effectthat apropertydescribedasStand 196 HillsideSouth,Township 14 of Matsheumhlope, in Bulawayo,which hepurchasedfrom oneDeclan Patrick Joseph Kelly, thethirdrespondent,wasdone with thefullknowledge of KingdomBank thefirstrespondent,as it was then known. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Disciplinary Appeals Committee that upheld the decision of the Disciplinary Committee to dismiss the Appellant from employment after committing a number of misconducts. More
This is an application for condonation of late noting of an appeal. The applicant was found guilty of breaching section 18.3 (12) of the respondent’s Code of Conduct. He was alleged to have fraudulently requested for $5-00 parking fees instead of $2-00 established by management. He was dismissed and subsequently followed the wrong route on appeal. The applicant was a self-actor at the time. The National Employment Council for the Motor Industry subsequently advised the applicant that the appeal lies with the Labour Court. More
This is an appeal at the instance of the appellant employee against the decision of the respondent’s appeals body. The facts giving rise to the matter are that the appellant was accused of breaching respondent code of conduct by receiving $5 parking fees for parking a bus at the designated car park yet he went on to pay an amount less than the $5 which he received. He was brought before a disciplinary committee which reached a deadlock in respect of his guilt but was subsequently found guilty because of the chairperson’s casting vote. He was consequently dismissed from employment.... More
The matter was heard before myself on the 6th of May, 2013. The court after an attempted mediation directed the parties to, if possible, settle the matter out of court. In the event that settlement failed the parties were to approach the Registrar for the court to hand down judgment. Both parties through communication to the Court (the Appellant through a letter dated 18th June, 2013 and the Respondent through a letter dated 2 October, 2013) advised of their failure to settle. The parties having failed to settle the matter amicably I now address the merits of the appeal placed... More
On 29 June 2021, I gave judgment ex tempore. I have been requested to give reasons and these are they.
The matter was placed before me as a chamber application for condonation and upliftment of bar in terms of Order 32 r 241 as read with Order 12 r 84(1)(a) of the Rules of the High Court, 1971. More
The appellant appeals against an order handed down by the High Court (the court a quo) on 29 June 2021. The court a quo dismissed his application for condonation and upliftment of the bar. The bar arose from the appellant’s failure to serve his appearance to defend on the respondents within 24 hours, in breach of r 49 of the then subsisting High Court rules, 1971. These rules were repealed and replaced by the new rules, High Court rules, 2021 on 23 July 2021. More
Following a disciplinary hearing, this Tribunal on 15th April 2021 ordered that the applicant’s name be deleted from the register of legal practitioners, notaries public and conveyancers. The applicant now seeks the suspension of that order pending the determination of the appeal he noted with the Supreme Court. Such relief is provided for in s 29(3) of the Legal Practitioners Act [Chapter 27:07]. More
The plaintiff herein claims the eviction of the defendants from the stand in dispute, together with holding over damages, and costs of suit on a higher scale. The primary issue for determination is whether or not the transfer of the property to the plaintiff was properly effected. The plaintiff’s entitlement to an eviction order and holding over damages hinges upon the answer to that question. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Magistrate’s Court sitting at Mutare on 9 September 2020 where the Magistrate dismissed an application filed by the Appellant for Rescission of a default judgment.
The appeal is opposed.
FACTS
On 27 January 2020 the Respondent instituted summons against Appellant claiming $200 000-00 adultery damages. On 16 June 2020 Respondent applied for default judgment which was granted by the Provincial Magistrate. Appellant had been served through his wife on 18 February 2020. On 7 July 2020 a warrant of execution was issued in favour of the Respondent. More
This is an application for a compelling order. Its genesis is that:
The first Respondent is a body corporate involved in the business of land development and related transactions. Sometime in 2013 the Applicant purchased a piece of land from the second Respondent and reduced that purchase into writing on 24 July 2013. The piece of land in question is situate in an area which was/is being developed by the first Responded. It is common cause that pursuant to the sale agreement between the Applicant and the second Respondent the applicant approached the first Respondent for the purposes of the... More
