In this matter the appellant lodged an appeal against the decision of the court a quo wherein the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim and ruled in favour of the defendant. The matter was centred on whether or not there was breach of contract warranting cancellation of the agreement between the parties and thus effectively barring the plaintiff from claiming specific performance to enforce the agreement. The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal: More
This is a claim for damages for interference with a lease agreement in the sum of ZAR 2 620 000-00. The basis upon which the claim is founded is that the defendant unlawfully took possession of a bus which was the subject of a lease agreement between the plaintiff and one Norman Gasa thereby depriving the plaintiff of the rentals which would have been paid to it by the said Norman Gasa who was the lessee. More
This is an appeal against the decision of an Arbitratorsitting at Harare.Before the appeal could be argued respondent raised a point in liminethat the appellant has approached this court with dirty hands. The respondent submitted that the appellant approached this court before complying with the decision of the Arbitrator. It is trite that in terms of Section 92 E (2) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01] (The Act) an appeal does not suspend the operation of the decision appealed against. Further Section 92 E(3) of the Act provides a party with a chance to apply for the suspension of the... More
This is an application for interim Relief as provided for in section 92 E(3) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01] as read with section 17 of the Labour Court Rules (SI 159/06). More
Appellant’s prayer in her claim before the Arbitrator was that since she was then employed on a contract without limit of time, she was entitled to three months’ notice of $2 700,00.
The term of reference to the Arbitrator which the Arbitrator considered was –
“whether or not claimant had a legitimate expectation that her contract of employment would be renewed for a further period of 6 months.
If so, the remedy thereof.” More
Appellant was arraigned before a Disciplinary Committee on 6 charges in terms of the 1st schedule of the Public Service Regulations S.I. 1/2000 (The Regulations). Four of the charges were found to have been proven, and as a result the Disciplinary Authority discharged her from the Respondent’s employ. More
: The applicant has approached this court seeking an order declaring all the respondents herein to be in contempt of court for failure to comply with an order given under HH 08/11 in which the applicant was awarded damages in lieu of reinstatement. The applicant seeks that the respondents be imprisoned for 90 days the period of which is to be suspended on condition that the respondents comply with the order within 14 days. The application is opposed by the third respondent only who incidentally is the former employer of the applicant. More
The applicant in this matter was charged with and convicted of assault in July 1999. He was fined $400 or in default of payment ordered to serve two months in prison. He was further sentenced to imprisonment for one month, all of which was suspended for five years on certain conditions. He successfully appealed against both conviction and sentence More
On 14 June 2013, I granted the applicant leave to file an additional supporting affidavit in the matter which was before me; an application for rescission of judgment and upliftment of bar. Advocate Mpofu for the first respondent immediately expressed displeasure with my ruling and sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the interlocutory order I had granted. I granted the applicant leave to appeal and indicated that I will give my reasons for allowing the filing of an additional supporting affidavit by the applicant. I now proceed to do so. More
On 2 December 2016 I granted a provisional order restraining the respondents from preventing the applicant sitting an examination that was scheduled for 5 December 2016. More
On 22nd May 2006 I issued a Provisional Order in favour of the applicants. I have now been requested to furnish reasons for judgment by the second and third respondents. These are they.
This matter was initially set down for hearing before me on 2nd May 2006. At the hearing I directed that the matter be stood down to Friday to allow the respondents to file heads of argument as Mr Drury on behalf of the applicants had filed heads of argument. On the 5th May the respondents were not ready and the matter was rolled over to the following... More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court handed down on 3 June 2020 which upheld the second respondent’s claim to immovable property and / or mining claims located in Mashonaland West placed under judicial attachment by the first respondent for sale in execution of a judgment. The judgment also saddled the appellants, being the judgment creditors, with costs on the superior scale. More
Appellant was aggrieved by the National Employment Council Appeals Board’s decision upholding Respondent’s decision to transfer him from Harare to Hwange and has approached this Court seeking a reversal of the transfer. More
The applicant seeks an order compelling 1st respondent to consent to the cancellation of a mortgage bond No. 2181/2004. The mortgage bond was registered in 1st respondent’s favour in 2004. The mortgage bond was securing a loan that the 1st respondent advanced to the applicant in the same year. The founding affidavit was deposed to by Agnes Danda, by virtue of a special power of attorney granted to her by the applicant. More
Applicants have approached this Court for rescission of the judgment granted in favour of Respondent on 28 January, 2013. Applicants allege that they were not aware of the Court date as they were not served. The application for rescission was made on 25th February, 2013 but has managed to be heard some eight (8) months later. This speaks volumes on the administration of justice and what the beneficiaries of the system must think of it. More
