The plaintiff and the defendant are siblings. The plaintiff who is the younger of the two brought a claim against her brother the defendant for payment of the sum of $200 000.00 being the balance due and payable in respect of shares sold to the defendant. The plaintiff also sought interest on the above amount at the prescribed rate and costs of suit on a legal practitioner-client scale. More
The appellant was employed by the respondent company as a miner surveyor. She was charged with acts of misconduct. Disciplinary proceedings were conducted against her . She found guilty. She was penalized with dismissal. Her appeal internally failed. More
: The dispute in this case is essentially between the plaintiff and the first defendant who both claim to have purchased stand number 2110 Solani Epworth from the second defendant. The plaintiff claims to have bought the property on 12 March 2000 but did not take session of the purchased property. The second defendant however, later purchased the same property from the first defendant and took cession on 21 of March 2003. The session was duly registered by the third defendant in its capacity as the Local Board and owner of the property in dispute. More
This is an appeal against a judgment rendered by the Magistrates’ Court which was in favour of the respondent (the applicant then) against the appellant (the respondent then). The order was in the following terms; More
Applicant worked for Respondent as a teacher in Harare. She was dismissed from employment for misconduct. She appealed to respondent’s Appeals Officer who dismissed the appeal on the 16th June 2022. On the 8th July 2022 she appealed to this Court. The matter proceeded under reference LC/H/595/22 until applicant withdrew the appeal on the 17th October 2022. The present application was then filed on the 24th October 2022. Rule 19(1) of the Court’s Rules requires that an appeal should be filed within 21 (twenty-one) days of the impugned order. Therefore, the intended appeal in case is 3 months out of... More
The two accused persons were convicted on their own pleas of guilty to contravening s 4 (2) of the Firearms Act [Cap 10:09] after they were found in possession of a firearm which was in the dashboard of a Toyota Raum they were using. The firearm is registered but in the name of someone else. More
This matter came before me on 8th November 2013 for the Application for Condonation for late noting of appeal. Respondent raised a point in limine in that Applicant had not complied with the Rules of the Court and as a result Applicant should be barred in terms of Rule 19 (1). Respondent further stated that the Court should proceed in terms of Rule 28 (6) (b) as Applicant had not filed Heads of Argument in compliance with the Rules. More
The matter was reserved to enable me to consider whether the respondent who had failed to file a notice of response in terms of the Labour Court rules, 2006, had shown good cause for his failure to file a response.
Initially the respondent had requested the court to postpone the matter to enable then to pursue an application for condonation and up lifting of the bar that was operating against then. The court did not agree that the postponement would serve any useful purpose. The court advised the applicant that the matter would proceed in terms of rule 22 (a)... More
The plaintiff is a Philippino national resident in Zimbabwe. She on 1 June 1984 married Apolonio Ramos Dacany a Philipino in the Philippines.She thereafter on 16 February 2000 marriedthe late Baker Eddy Morten an American who was resident in Zimbabwe. The later marriage was solemnised in Zimbabwe. She at the subsequent marriage presented herself as a divorcee. She apparently complied with the requirements for the marriage of a divorcee. The magistrate who conducted the marriage said she presented a divorceorder which enabled him to issue them with a marriage certificate. More
This is an urgent chamber application for a provisional order whose interim relief sought is couched as follows:
“Interim Relief Granted
That pending the return date respondent be and are hereby ordered to restore vacant possession and occupation of Flat 112 Dandaro Village, Borrowdale, Harare to the applicant with immediate effect”.
The terms of the final order are construed as follows:-
“1. That the first and second and third respondents be and are hereby ordered not to resort to self help and in so doing evict the applicant or lock her out or deny her access to Flat 112 Dandaro... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Magistrate’s Court Bulawayo given on the 17th of July 2018. The appellant raises 4 grounds on this appeal namely that:-1. The court a quo grossly erred and misdirected itself in finding that improper pressure was exerted on the respondent into signing the acknowledgement of debt.
2. The court a quo further erred and grossly misdirected itself in holding that the audit process conducted by PNA Chartered Accountants shambolic and could not be relied upon.
3. The court a quo further erred and grossly misdirected itself in failing to find and uphold... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the works council appeals committee which upheld appellant’s dismissal following fraud allegations in breach of the respondent’s code of conduct. More
The applicant and the 2nd respondent both lay claim to the same mining block situated in the Mberengwa district of the Midlands Province, each apparently fortified in his claim by the mine registration documents granted his favour. Whereas the applicant’s mine is known as Lockhead 1 mine, that of the 2nd respondent goes by the name Aqua 5 mine. The applicant acquired his mine in 2017 having taken all the necessary steps required by 1st respondent for such registration. The 2nd respondent on the other ‘inherited’ his mine from his late father Lazarus Musipa, the latter who had acquired registration... More
The applicant approached this court seeking a declaratur in terms of s 14 of the High Court [Chapter 7:06]. The applicant is seeking an order declaring that the seizure of the ISUZU KB 300 LE Single Cab truck Registration Number ABA1128 by the third respondent be and is hereby declared illegal.
The brief background which gave rise to this application is that sometime in 2011, the applicant purchased the motor vehicle in question from his mother-in-law a Mrs Mungofa who also had purchased it from EU Microproject Programme in 2010 at Ruby Auctions.
In February 2015, the motor vehicle was... More
The Respondent raised a preliminary objection because up to the time of the hearing, the Applicant had not filed Heads of Argument, in contravention of Rule 19 of the Labour Court Rules. Respondent’s counsel said the Applicant is therefore barred in terms of Rule 19 (3) and should not be heard. More
