This is an application for variation of the consent paper and divorce order granted by this court under cover case number HC 125/14. The basis of the application is section 9 of the Matrimonial Causes Act (Chapter 5:13) (The Act), and section 81 (2) (3) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment No. 20 2013. (the Constitution) More
The new High Court Rules being Statutory Instrument 202 of 2021 have ushered in challenges in as much as they have brought clarity in certain areas. The need to revisit and streamline the rules for the attainment of clarity, cohesion and practicality much needed to regulate and maintain a coherent justice delivery system calls for urgent attention. Rules should not have gaps nor leave the litigants or the court in a quandary as to what next to do in pursuing a certain procedure. Rule 42 is one such provision that requires attention as this case has shown. More
: The applicant approached this court on urgency seeking the following order:
TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT ARE AS FOLLOWS:
That you show cause to the Honorable court why a final order should not be in the following terms:-
1. The first respondent be and are hereby ordered to demolish any structures which he erected on Stand 40295 Belvedere, Harare or subdivided portion thereof known as Stand 41550 Belvedere, and fill up all the trenches dug there at pending the finalization of the case in HC 2973/21.
2. The first respondent is interdicted from effecting any developments or taking occupation... More
The applicant claims to hold rights, title and interest in a property situate in Belvedere suburb, Harare called stand 40295 Belvedere measuring 2106 square metres. She claims to have purchased the property by reason of a cession of rights from one Chris Edwin who had purchased the property from the third respondent. The agreement of sale between Chris Edwin and the third respondent was attached to the applicant’s supplementary affidavit filed on 25 July 2022. That agreement was executed by the third respondent and Chris Edwin on 10 October 2016. In terms of clause 8 of the agreement of sale... More
[1] At the commencement of the hearing of this appeal, Mr Magwaliba advised the Court that the parties had agreed to request adetermination on the preliminary issue, raised in the issues for determination in the pre-trial hearing minute filed by the parties in this matter- which is, whether there is before the Court a valid appeal in respect of which the Court can assume jurisdiction. The parties agreed that a determination of the preliminary point would be dispositive of the appeal.
[2] Briefly, the relevant facts forming the background of the matter are as follows. On 12 March 2020 the... More
[1] This is an application for, inter alia, declaratory orders and consequential relief. The declaratur sought is couched in the following terms:
i. The respondent has an obligation to facilitate easy and formal access to foreign currency by the public.
ii. The existing regulatory framework is overly restrictive and unlawfully hinders applicant from having easy access to foreign currency.
The consequential relief sought is that:
iii. A mandamus be and is hereby issued directing the respondent to expand the willing-buyer-willing-seller trading arrangement to permit applicant and the general public to access forex through banks and bureaux de change within thirty... More
MAKONESE J: The two applicants are facing serious allegations of robbery in contravention of section 126 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act (Chapter) 9:23. The state alleges that on 1st January 2021 and at around 2200 hours at 4462 Gwabalanda, Bulawayo applicants were part of a group of four assailants who produced a knife and placed it on the complainant’s neck threatening to cut his throat at the same time demanding cash and valuables. Applicants and their associates then forced the complainant to lie down on the middle of the road whilst the complainant’s friend was being held... More
This an application for condonation for reinstatement of a matter following abandonment. It is opposed.
The background of the matter is that the applicant noted an appeal with this Court sometime in 2022.The respondent duly filed its notice of response as stipulated in the Rules of this Court, Statutory Instrument 150/2017 ( the Rules /S.I. 150/17).Thereafter the applicant’s representatives did not file heads of argument in terms of the Rules. More
The appellant in this case was charged with an act of misconduct by her employer, the respondent.
She was found guilty and the employer imposed the following penalty:
“that she should not be promoted to the next grade for the next five (5) years.”
She was aggrieved with both the conviction and the penalty and she noted this appeal.
The facts of the matter are common cause. More
Applicant was employed by the Respondents as a Lecturer at the Harare Polytechnic College. She was charged with misconduct it being alleged that she had refused to comply with instructions to be appraised by her superiors at the College. It was also averred inn those charges of misconduct that she had made false reports against two of her supervisors resulting in their arrest and prosecution. Appellant was found guilty and a penalty of dismissal was imposed. Appellant is dissatisfied with this outcome and has approached this Court for relief. I should also mention that Appellant made an application for review... More
: This is a court application for the registration of a caveat on the immovable property being certain piece of land situate in the district of Salisbury called stand 2126 Tynwald South Township of stand 1042 Tynwald Township measuring 220 square metres and held under Deed of Transfer number 257/2023. The first and second respondents are the registered owners of the said property. They are also husband and wife. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Intellectual Property Tribunal of Zimbabwe, “the Tribunal”, delivered at Harare on 29 May 2019 wherein the Tribunal upheld the appeal noted by the respondent against the decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks. More
Applicant applied to this Court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court in terms of Section 92 F (2) of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 as read with Rule 93 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017.
At the onset of oral argument Respondent applied for upliftment of bar and condonation of belated Response and heads of argument. Applicant opposed the respondent’s application. Respondent submitted that the application for leave to appeal was served on them on 23 April 2024. More
