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
On 11 February 2021 the applicant approached this court through the urgent chamber book. The respondent was duly served with the application and set down date for hearing on 12 February 2021. In compliance with the practice direction, the applicant filed the application inclusive of heads of argument, in conformity with the directive. The matter was determined on papers in chambers. The respondent was properly served but did not file any response opposing or conceding the application. I thus proceeded to entertain the unopposed application and granted the provisional order with an indication that reasons would be availed. More
This is an application for review in terms of Rules 20 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017.
The reasons for writing this judgment are the developments that took place in this matter.
The present application was filed by one Austin Ndota on 10 January 2025 and it has cited Martin Manyika as the Second Respondent. The decision of the said Martin Manyika purportedly issued on 18 December 2024 is attached to the application for Review. The application is prefaced thus:
“Please take Notice that the Applicant hereby applies for review of proceedings and the resultant determination by a Designated Agent... More
This is an appeal against refusal of bail. It arises out of a ruling handed down by the Regional Magistrate sitting at Harare, on 29 May 2024, during initial remand proceedings wherein the appellant was brought before the court on charges of robbery, as defined in s 126 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] (“the Criminal Law Code”). More
This is an application for the reinstatement of a matter onto the roll. It is opposed.
It appears common cause that there are various matters connected to the present matter. This presentation was deemed abandoned after the applicant failed to comply with Rule 46 of the rules of this Court. More
Appellant was Headmaster of Borrowdale Primary School having taken over in November 2009, He was charged with several counts of a misconduct and the Disciplinary Authority deemed it fit to impose a penalty of dismissal. The Disciplinary Committee had however recommended that he be fined USD200.00 to be deducted in two instalments and further that he be warned and cautioned. He is dissatisfied with both the conviction and penalty and seeks redress in this Court. More
This is an application for quantification of damages. This is pursuant to a court order that:
“The respondent be and is hereby ordered to reinstate the appellant to his post with no loss of salary and benefits with effect from date of dismissal. In the event that reinstatement is no longer possible, the respondent be and is hereby ordered to award the appellant appropriate damages as agreed between the parties. Should parties fail to agree, either party may approach this court for quantification.” More
The applicant is former owner of Ivordale Farm (“the farm”). It is 1059.167 hectares in extent. It is situated in the district of Goromonzi under Mashonaland East Province. More
This is an urgent chamber application in terms of which the applicant seeks the following relief as set out in the provisional order:-
TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. That it be and is hereby declared that the letter of Mr A Tsimba in his capacity as Acting Provincial Resettlement Officer – Mashonaland East Province drawn on the 10 May, 2017 for the Ministry of Lands and Resettlement providing an eviction / vacate date and cessation of possession, occupation, use... More
In this application, the applicant seeks the following relief as set out in the provisional order:
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
1. That it be and is hereby declared that second respondent’s dispossession of certain land and buildings in respect of applicant’s offer letter for a certain piece of land described as Subdivision 2 of Ivordale in the Goromonzi district of Mashonaland East Province measuring approximately 449.792 ha in extent dated 16 July, 2014 (hereinafter called “the property”) which physical dispossession took place on or about the 5th December, 2016 and on subsequent days thereafter is and was unlawful on... More
This matter is an application for the registration of a Labour Court judgment in terms of section 92B(3) of the Labour Court Act [Chapter 28:01]. That court in LC/H/2020 awarded the applicant the sum of US$177 408 on the 25th of September 2020. The applicant now seeks registration of that judgment which sounds in money. In opposing the application, the respondent makes the following averments. The judgment is unenforceable and cannot be registered. It is in conflict with the law or it is contra bonos mores. The judgment purports to revive a matter that has prescribed. It orders payment of... More
