This is an interlocutory appeal against the judgment of the High Court (“the court a quo”) dismissing the appellant’s application for recusal of the presiding judge in the court a quo. The appeal is brought without leave as the question of leave does not arise. This is because the dismissal of an application for recusal has the effect of a final and definitive order. In Moch v Nedtravel 1996 (3) SA 1 (A) the Appellate Court held that no leave is required in such an interlocutory appeal. No issues arise from that observation in this case. I therefore proceed to... More
The applicant and two other co-accused persons stand charged with the murder of one Sipho Million Mncube. The crime was allegedly committed on 12 March 2020. As part of his investigations, the second respondent who happens to be the investigating officer, approached the third respondent for an order to compel the applicant to produce samples of his blood for comparison with samples of blood on some recovered blood stained clothes. The applicant withheld his consent to the extraction of his blood samples for that purpose.It is the warrant of search and seizure that was issued by the third respondent on... More
On 19 October 2017 respondent issued summons against the appellant praying for the eviction of the appellant and all those acting through him from Machapuya Village, Chipangara Township, Chikore, Chipinge. He also claimed holding over damages of $200-00 per month from the date of summons to date of eviction, he also wanted the court to grant him vacant possession of the Machapuya Village and costs. Respondent brought the action against the appellant in his personal capacity as the executor of the estate late Luke Zemutsa and Julia Mwero Kudhlande who died in 2010. Respondent was appointed executor of the estate... More
This is an appeal against both conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellants by the Magistrates Court at Nyanga. The appellants were convicted of public violence as defined in s 36 (1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. They were each sentenced to 36 months imprisonment of which 12 months imprisonment was suspended for 5 years on condition that each one of them does not within that period commit any offence involving violence for which upon conviction he is sentenced to imprisonment without the option of a fine. A further 4 months imprisonment was suspended on... More
On 8 October 2009 the parties appeared before Honourable G Mhuri on appeal wherein the appellant was raising procedural irregularities and substantive issues. More
The applicants herein applied for bail pending trial following their arrest on a charge of contravening section 82 (1) of Statutory Instrument 362/1990 as read with section 128(1) (b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act. The charge criminalises the “unlawful possession of unmarked raw ivory”. The applicants were arrested on 31 March 2021, and appeared at Harare Magistrates Court on 1 April 2021. Because of the nature of the offence which attracts a minimum mandatory sentence of nine years unless special circumstances exist, the applicants were advised to apply for bail at the High Court. The Magistrates Court has no... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the 1st respondent’s Disciplinary Authority.
In its notice of response to the appeal, 1st respondent raised and persisted with a preliminary point to the effect that 1st respondentwas improperly cited. The Minister and not the Ministry should have been cited as required under Section 3 of the State Liabilities Act [Chapter 8:14]. By citing the Ministry, appellant made a fundamental error which cannot be remedied. The Ministry is too broad which makes it impossible to be sued, so argued the respondent. More
This is a consolidated appeal of LC/H/293/2012 and LC/H/296/2012 against the decisions of the respondent works council appeal body which confirmed the appellants’ dismissal in cases where the appellants allegedly stole eleven layer boards in contravention of the respondent Code of Conduct.
Facts of the case are that the appellants who were in the respondent’s employ as loader and truck assistant respectively were on 4 December 2011 charged with the responsibility of loading a beverage truck destined for Nyameni. When the truck which they had loaded was intercepted by the respondent’s other employees it was discovered that eleven extra boards... More
MAKONI JA: This is an opposed application for leave to appeal made in terms of s 44 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06] as read with r20 (1) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018.
The applicant was convicted of rape and sentenced to an effective 10 years imprisonment by the Harare Regional Court on 11 July 2016. His appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed by the High Court on 29 May 2019. He sought leave to appeal to this Court, against the dismissal of his appeal, before the High court which leave was declined on 10 December 2020... More
This is an appeal against the arbitral award by Honourable G Kwaramba that was handed down on 12 December 2014. The award is couched as follows
“Wherefore after going through submissions filed of record by parties, the claimant’s case is do and hereby considered regarding overtime. The respondent is ordered to negotiate overtime within 7 days with the claimants, failure of which either party to approach this tribunal for quantification.”
The brief facts of the matter are that the contracts of termination of employment filed of record indicate that the respondents were employed as security guards by CCC. More
The appellants were convicted of three counts of culpable homicide as defined in s 49 of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act, [Cap 9:23]. They were sentenced to 15 months imprisonment of which 5 months were suspended on conditions of good behaviour and a further 10 months were suspended on condition that the appellants performed 350 hours of community service. Aggrieved by their conviction and sentence, they now appeal to this court against both. More
At the commencement of this matter, both parties applied to have supplementary affidavits admitted. Neither counsel objecting to the admissions, both were admitted by consent More
