The appellant was arraigned before the Regional Magistrate Rusape facing allegations of rape as defined in s 65 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act[Chapter 9:23], in that on 22 October 2019 and at House number 399 Tsanzaguru Rusape, the accused unlawfully had sexual intercourse with Tanatswa Tandi a female juvenile aged 16 without her consent or knowing that she had not consented to it or realising that there was a real risk or possibility that she might not have consented to it. Having pleaded not guilty the matter proceeded to a fully fledged trial. The appellant was found... More
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic this is a matter which I indicated to the parties that I would determine on the papers without hearing oral submissions. The directions that I gave for the filing of papers including heads of argument were duly complied with. I am indebted to the applicant and the first respondent’s counsel for that. The second respondent which is the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe N.O (RBZ) did not respond to the application. More
: In essence this is a dispute over ownership of an immovable property known as stand 750 Greystone Township 10 of Greystone A, Harare which is also known as 750 Gaydon Road Greystone Park, Harare. It is a case which graphically illustrates the conundrum of deploying incorporation laws and rules to register ownership of immovable property, a favourite pastime of many business people in this country. It is a habit usually informed by a desire to take advantage of the protection afforded by company law, in particular that an incorporation once incorporated, has the capacity of a natural person in... More
The applicants seek, by court application, an order confirming the cancellation of a sale agreement involving shares entered into between the first applicant and the respondent on 11 October 2011 and the eviction of the respondent from stand 750 Greystone Township of Greystone A, Harare as well as costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
The appellant was engaged by the respondent sometime in January 2014 until May 2014 in the capacity of a welder. When such engagement was terminated, the appellant lodged a complaint with the Ministry of Labour. Failing conciliation, the dispute was referred to arbitration with the following terms of reference;
a) To determine whether or not the claimant was an employee and remedy thereof.
b) To determine whether or not claimant was lawfully dismissed, if he was an employee and the remedy thereof.
c) To determine whether or not he was paid public... More
The plaintiff, an incorporation involved in the business of repairing and servicing motor vehicles, contracted the defendant, another incorporation which prides itself as the only company in Zimbabwe with the expertise to supply and fix industrial interlocking rubber tiles, to supply and fix such industrial interlocking rubber tiles at its service workshop at the corner of Robson Manyika Avenue and Julius Nyerere Street in Harare sometime in May 2010. More
In this application, the applicant seeks a provisional order in the following terms;
“Terms of Final Order Sought
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why an order should not be granted in the following terms:
1. Respondent in fencing its cantonment area or operation shall not include the applicant’s land which was purchased from Kadoma Rural District Council which is also known as number 2 The Range until there’s an order from a competent court to do so.
2. Respondent to pay costs of suit at a higher scale. More
On the 1th August 2023 Respondent’s disciplinary authority issued a final written warning to Appellant. The warning is valid for 12(twelve) months, Appellant then appealed to this Court in terms of section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
This is an urgent chamber application in which the applicant seeks an interim interdict against the first respondent and all its functionaries, that they be barred from interfering, interrupting, disturbing or hindering its activities, at Hunyani 30 Mine Hunyani Farm Mashonaland West. The final order sought is the confirmation of the interim interdict.
The founding affidavit was deposed to by a Mr John Mandere, a director and shareholder in the applicant, a company duly registered in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe. The first respondent is a body corporate in terms of s 3 of the Chinhoyi University of Technology... More
On 8 January 2016 this court granted a provisional order in favour of the applicant in the following;
1. That the first respondent and all those claiming occupation through it, be and are hereby barred from interfering, interrupting, disturbing and hindering the use and possession by the applicant, of Hunyani 30 Mine Hunyani Farm, Mashonaland West, pending the return date. More
Applicants claimed that over the years, the executive committee in the form of 1st to 8th respondents have failed to adhere to the terms of the Constitution in that they have not presented any audited accounts, have not presented any budget for approval, have not presented any income and expenditure account notwithstanding the fact that they had received payment of royalties from hunting activities in the name and under the payment issued to the association by the Department of Parks and Wildlife. The executive committee in the meantime sought and obtained hunting permits at least twice before and for the... More
This is a court application in which the applicant seeks specific performance drawn in the following terms:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. Within seven days from the date of service of this order by the Sheriff of Zimbabwe the respondent shall deliver 25 200, 50 kg bags of PC 15 cement, at the applicant’s address office No. 15 1st Floor Plumpton Chambers, Hebert Chitepo Street, Mutare, failure of which the Sheriff of Zimbabwe with or without the assistance of the Zimbabwe Republic Police and (sic) is hereby authorized to effect this order.
2. That the respondent shall pay costs of... More
This matter appeared before me on 9 October 2020. Mr N.Mlalaappeared for the applicant whilst Ms S. Mhlanga appeared for the 2nd and 3rd respondents.
After a brief hearing, the parties settled the matter and agreed that an order by consent be made, to the following effect.
1. That the Provisional Order is set aside as prayed for.
2. The applicant pay costs of suit on the ordinary scale.
Ms S. Mhlanga for the 2nd and 3rdrespondents who were the victors in the matter has asked for reasons for judgment regrading clause 2 of the order. More
