1. This matter was set down on the unopposed motion court and was being postponed to enable plaintiffs’ counsel to file supplementary heads in support of the order sought. The matter was finally heard by me on 16 June 2022. After hearing submissions in support of the order sought by the plaintiffs I reserved judgment. More
This application for a declaratur seeks the following relief:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. The Applicant be and is hereby allowed to join the Public Service Commission and capable of being employed as a teacher if she meets the desired job description.
2. The Respondents’ conduct against the Applicant be held to be unlawful and wrongful.
3. The Respondents to pay costs of suit on a client –attorney scale.” More
On the 24th November 2016, we upheld the appeal in this matter with costs. A request for reasons having been made, these are they,
The appellant in this matter had applied for the following relief in the court a quo.
1. That 1st respondent be interdicted from claiming rentals from the applicant’s tenants in respect of Stand No. 22 and 23, Neshuro Township.
2. That 2nd and 3rd respondents be More
Most of the facts in this case are common cause. The undisputed facts are that on the 7th of October 2014 the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a Tobacco Contract Growing and Marketing Scheme on condition that the plaintiff would provide the defendant with financial and input support for the production of flue cured tobacco. The defendant was obliged to produce flue cured tobacco on 10 hectares of land yielding a minimum of 25 000kg of tobacco. The defendant was obliged to further repay the loaned amount at the end of the 2015 Tobacco Selling Season which was on... More
This is a court application brought in terms of r 29(1)(a) of the High Court Rules 2021. The applicants have prayed for the rescission of the order granted by this court on 18 October2022 under case number HACC 28/22, per KWENDA J. They contend that the order was erroneously granted in their absence. More
This is an appeal against a judgment of the High Court sitting at Harare handed down on 8 August 2018 dismissing an application for joinder of the eighth respondent in a pending matter instituted by the appellant in the High Court. More
This is a chamber application in terms of r 43 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018 for condonation of the failure to comply with r 38 (1) of the same Rules and an extension of time in which to appeal. The applicant seeks an order in the following terms:
1. The application for condonation for non-compliance with Rule 38(1)(a) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018 (Statutory Instrument No: 84 of 2018) be and is hereby granted.
2. The application for extension of time within which to file and serve a notice of appeal in terms of the rules be and... More
This is a delictual claim for delivery of a vehicleor alternatively payment of damages. At the beginning of the trial the plaintiff withdrew its claim against Kudzai Shaba.
The dispute between the parties arises from the following brief facts.On 25 August 2008 Kudzai Shaba, acting as an agent of the first and second defendants sold to the plaintiff a Mercedes Benz C180, 2004 model. Sometime in February 2009 the plaintiff was arrested by the South African Police Service, SAPS, for possession of a suspectedstolen motor vehicle. The vehicle was impoundedand the plaintiff wascharged,convicted and fined for possession of the vehicle.... More
The plaintiff operates a foreign currency denominated account with the respondent bank at one of its Harare branches. It is common cause that as at 12.00 noon on 24 February 2003, the plaintiff’s account reflected a credit balance of US$11 694.11. It is further common cause that on 25 February 2005, the plaintiff instructed the bank to telegraphically transfer to a named beneficiary, the sum of US$11 0000-00. As he was leaving the bank after the transaction, he was approached by an employee of the bank, one Murape, who inquired as to whether he had US$5 000-00 for sale. The... More
This matter was placed before me on 22 March 2021for review with a cover note raising a procedural issue in the way the trial Magistrate canvassed the essential elements during the proceedings. More
The facts are common cause and are briefly that the application was employed by the respondent as a sales consultant. He was charged with acts of misconduct in terms of Section 4 (a) of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) regulations, 2006 (SI 15/06) (National Code). It was alleged that on 29 August 2022 and 1st September 2022 the applicant had allegedly accessed a customer’s call data and shared same with the customer’s husband without getting permission from the customer. It was alleged further that on 29 August 2022, applicant had sent a WhatsApp message in a work group... More
The plaintiffs in this case seek the ejectment of all the defendants (who are 30 in all), and of all persons claiming title through them, from the property known as Railway Farm 26, in Chegutu.
At the inception of the trial of this matter, the plaintiffs formally withdrew their action against the 31st defendant, namely, the Minister of Lands, Agriculture and Rural Resettlement. Plaintiffs’ counsel also sought judgement by default as against those defendants who were not personally present at the trial. However, counsel for the defendants submitted that the 8th defendant, Jeremiah Chikepe, had been appointed and authorised to... More
This is an application for condonation for the late filing of an application for review. The application is opposed. At the hearing of the application, a preliminary point was raised by the respondent. The respondent argued that the applicant had failed to comply with the provisions of Rule 11 A (4) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017 (as amended) (the Rules). More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award which upheld the dismissal of the appellant from the respondent’s employ. The arbitrator proceeded on the basis of written submissions as agreed to by the parties. More
On 24 November 2021 my brother WAMAMBO J and myself heard arguments in relation to this appeal matter from Mr S. Ganya for the appellant and Mr B. E Mathose for the respondent being the State. We then proceeded to give reasons for the judgment ex tempore. More
