This application for rescission of default judgment is made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade in his official capacity as such. The Minister Frederick Shava deposed to the founding affidavit. The brief background to this application is as detailed hereunder.
The respondent company Destiny Ventures (Propriety) Limited Botswana instituted proceedings in this court under case No. HC 741/21 against United Nations Children’s Education Fund (UNICEF). A default judgment was granted in favour of the respondent company on 7 July 2021 by MANGOTA J. The terms of that judgment were as follows: More
On 7 July 2021under case No. HC 741/21 in the matter between DESTINY VENTURES (PROPRIETARY) LTD (BOTSWANA) and UNITED NATIONS CHILDRENS FUND, this Court issued a default order against the respondent UNICEF. More
The applicant applied for leave to continue with proceedings under case number HC 242/17 (ref case No. HC 12080/16) against the respondent who is under judicial management for the recovery of $42 624.86. The applicant is one of about 25 creditors who are owed money by the respondent. More
This is an application for condonation for late noting of an appeal against the decision of Rushambwa, Esquire Magistrate sitting at Zvishavane Magistrates’ Court on 27 March 2015. More
This judgment addresses an application for condonation for the late filing of the notice of opposition and heads of argument by the applicants. The applicants further seek the upliftment of the bar imposed due to such non-compliance. The application has been vehemently opposed by the first respondent. More
Applicants applied to this Court for rescission of judgement in terms of section 92C of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01` as read with Rule 43 of the Labour Court Rules S.I. 150/17. Respondent opposed the application. More
The applicant is a Minister of Government in Zimbabwe. He is in charge of, among other things, social welfare. Evidently not wanting to be left behind in this digital era, he contracted the first respondent to supply both the hardware and the software for a biometric or card-based platform to facilitate the administration of social welfare programmes to vulnerable groups in society across the country. More
The delay in the hand down of this judgement is sincerely regretted. The matter was placed before me as an application for the issuance of a disposal order. The application was made pursuant to Section 107 (1) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] as amended. The application was opposed by 2nd Respondent and supported by 1st Respondent. Both Respondents appeared for a hearing on the 13th of July 2022. More
This is an application for condonation of late noting of rescission of judgment application at the instance of the applicant employer. Facts giving rise to the matter are that the respondent employee made his review application to the Labour Court in a case pitting him and the applicant employer. The employer failed to file its response to the review timeously and the matter was subsequently set down for hearing in terms of rule 22 Labour Court rules. More
The applicant seeks condonation for late filing of Notice of Response.
The respondent was dismissed from the applicant’s employment following a misconduct determination by applicant’s Disciplinary Authority on 25 February 2014. The respondent noted an appeal with this Court on 27 March 2014. The Notice of Appeal was served on the applicant on 2 April 2014. More
On 5th July 2012 this Court made an order. The terms of the order read as follows,
“Respondent having failed to file its response in terms of Rule 15 of the Labour Court Rules Statutory Instrument 59 of 2006: and further having also failed to show good cause for such failure to file a notice of response, a default judgment be and is hereby entered against the Respondent. The appeal is consequently allowed by reason of Respondent’s default.” (The underlining for emphasis is mine) More
This matter was set down before me as a rescission of judgment application by the employer of a judgment which was granted in default by the Labour Court in favour of the employee. Parties will in the entirety of this judgment be referred to as employer and employee to avoid confusing the record since the record is replete with the parties interchanging roles depending on what application was before the court at the various stages. More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of heads of argument in case number HC 3268/16 (the main matter) in contravention of order 32 Rule 238 (2a) of the Rules of Court. More
