Respondent was employed by Appellant as Executive Director. It is common cause that Appellant reduced Respondent’s contracts to yearly contracts with effect from 2006. Respondent was subsequently informed of the termination of her duties on 3 November 2009. Respondent was replaced by another Executive Director who had started work prior to Respondent’s termination of contract. The matter was brought before an arbitrator who found in Respondent’s favour. However, both Appellant and Respondent are dissatisfied with the arbitrator’s decision albeit on different grounds. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Respondent Hospital’s Appeals Body which ruled that, the Appellants were guilty of contravening the Hospital’s Code of Conduct, by referring to various bodies communication about transport problems at the hospital and the acting which they intended to take in reaction to that. The act was alleged to discredit the hospital hence, the charges in question. More
The facts of the matter are that the respondent went on leave for the whole month of June. His evidence was that he was told by the employer to go on leave and the employer would call him back when they wanted him otherwise he would check with the employer when he came to collect his June salary. He was however charged with absenteeism and was found guilty and dismissed. More
This is a bail application pending trial. The applicants are charged with the crime of attempted murder as defined in s 189 as read with s 47 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform Act) [Chapter 9:23]. It being alleged that on 5 March 2023 the applicants acting in common purpose unlawfully attempted to cause the death of the complainant by assaulting him with logs and open hands all over the body. More
This is a claim for rei vindicatio. The brief facts are that the applicant is the owner of Inodzi Estate in Penhalonga. It is engaged in timber plantation. Sometime in 2010 the first respondent was allocated a plot at Inodzi Estate. Following engagements between the applicant and the second respondent such certificate was withdrawn on 17 October 2011. The first respondent was in exchange issued with an offer
letter for Plot 3 Savillen Mutasa District measuring 18 hectares. The first respondent did not move off Inodzi but continued in occupation. The applicant has approached this court for the eviction of... More
The Court is going to deal with the main appeal and cross appeal.
The brief history of this matter is that the employee was employed by appellant on a fixed term contract. He was engaged on 1st November 2014 and the contract was supposed to terminate on 30 April 2015. However the appellant terminated the contract on 30 January 2015 on notice. Respondent was paid cash in lieu of notice. The respondent approached the Labour officer with a case of unfair dismissal and non-payment of cash in lieu of overtime. More
The respondent was employed as a clerk by the appellant. In or around 2005 to 2006 the respondent was charged by the appellant for failure to obey a lawful instruction in that the appellant had been transferred from Penhalonga to Mutasa Rural District Council but had not reported for duty. This led to her dismissal. Aggrieved by the dismissal, the respondent approached a labour officer for conciliation. More
This is an application for confirmation of the Ruling by the Labour Officer Ms N.C. Mutiba. In the ruling that was handed down on 21st May 2019 the 2nd Respondents were acquitted of the misconduct charges. The 1st Respondent was ordered to reinstate the 2nd Respondent without loss of salary and benefits or to pay damages in lieu of reinstatement. More
The appellant was convicted and sentenced for unlawful possession or dealing in precious stones. The facts forming the charge and conviction are that on 5 May 2018 the appellant was searched by the police and was found with pieces of diamond in his pocket. The appellant was convicted after a protracted trial for contravening s 3 (1) as read with s 3 (2) (b) of Precious Stones Trade Act [Chapter 21:06]. The appellant was sentenced to the mandatory sentence of 5years imprisonment. Dissatisfied with the finding of the court a quo the appellant lodged the present appeal. More
The first and second applicants approached this court seeking the relief for the rescission of default judgment. More particularly, the draft order filed by the first and second applicants is as follows:
“1. Default judgment granted by this Honourable Court on 23rd day of June 2021 be and is hereby rescinded.
2. The Applicant be and is hereby given leave to defend the main action HC 1255-21.
3. Costs be in the main cause.” More
