: The applicant approached this court, on a certificate of urgency seeking an order in the following terms.
TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this HonourableCourt why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. That the Third respondent’s directive to first and second respondents barring them from selling and or registering the shares of Renaissance Securities (pvt) Limited (in liquidation) be and is hereby declared unlawful, void and of no force.
2. That the third respondent shall pay the costs of this application on the case of legal practitioner and... More
A dispute has arisen between the parties over proceeds from the sale of hemp. In that respect, applicant seeks an order directing the respondents to pay an amount of US$35,000 based principally on a document framed in the following terms; More
On the 30th of June 2022 the applicant obtained an order for damages for loss of business for the sum of ZWL608 832,00 and US$2 734 932,00 against Hwange Coal Gasification Company (Pvt) Ltd, under case number HC 660/22. The judgment was granted in default. On the 6th of July 2022 2nd respondent issued a writ of execution against immovable property. Various goods belonging to the defendant were placed under execution for disposal by way of sale by public auction. 4th respondent proceeded with the sale of some of the attached goods which were advertised as provided by the law... More
1. I received an urgent chamber application referenced HC 5081/22 on 1 August 2022. I set it down for hearing on 3 August 2022 at 1000 hours.
2. In the morning of 3 August 2022, I found a copy of a letter to the Honourable Judge President on my desk. The letter was dated 2 August 2022 and alleged that there had been prior discussions between myself and representatives of the firstrespondent.
3. At 1000 hours the hearing of the urgent chamber application commenced.Mr Mutero submitted that the concerns raised in the letter mentioned above were no longer persisted with.... More
This is a court application for a Declaratory Order and Consequential relief made in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7.06]. The application is for an order declaring that the amendments made by respondent on 18 November 2015 to Permit No. SD/381 issued by respondent on 7 April 1999 are null and void. The application also seeks that the amendments made by respondent to para 2 of the Subdivision Permit No. SD/381 regarding the status of the road on 18 November 2015 be and are hereby set aside. More
The appeal is lodged as against the determination by the Respondent disciplinary authority/committee handed down on 24 August, 2010, finding the Appellant guilty of “Gross negligence” (Section 2.3 of Collective Bargaining Agreement: Transport Operating Industry Statutory Instrument 94 of 95 and consequently imposing a dismissal penalty. More
On the 20thJuly 2018, the first respondent instituted legal proceedings against the applicant under HC 6771/18 where the first respondent sought an Order compelling the applicant to transfer stand 456 Prospect Township of Stand 85 of Prospect to him. According to the first respondent the parties had entered into an agreement of sale of the property and had paid the purchase price in full. On the 23rd July 2018 the first respondent allegedly served the application on one Crispen and using a certificate of service certified by a legal practitioner the first respondent applied for default judgment which was grantedby... More
An order dismissing this appeal with costs was made with reasons to follow. These are they.
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondents’ disciplinary authority dismissing the appellant from their employ. The dismissal was pursuant to the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings which were conducted against him. He was disciplined for:
“(i) Improper performance of duty …;”
and
(ii) Any act or omission which is consistent with or prejudicial to the discharge of official duties including abuse of authority.”
This were violations of paragraphs 2 and 24 respectively of the first Schedule of the Public Service Regulations Statutory,... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the arbitrator where he ruled that the appellant employee had been rightly found guilty of theft and dismissed from employment. Facts of the matter are that appellant who was in the respondent’s employ was sent to bank respondent’s cash. He was however handed back R10000 of the money he had taken to the bank. The teller however recorded that the full amount of R32000 had been banked yet R10000 had gotten back to appellant. More
This matter came before me as a stated case for argument. After hearing the parties I granted the order sought and indicated that my reasons would follow. I now set them out.
On 23 November 2000, the plaintiff issued summons seeking the ejectment of the defendant from certain residential property whose street name is no 509 ULC Area 13 Dangamvura Township, Mutare. The claim for ejectment was resisted by the second defendant. More
This was an application for review. The second respondent was a provincial magistrate. At all relevant times she was stationed at Zaka, one of the districts in the Province of Masvingo. It was the proceedings before her in the court below that were brought on review. On 25 August 2017 she granted a rule nisi ex parte. It was a provisional order of spoliation against the applicants herein [respondents therein], in favour of the first respondent herein [applicant therein] [hereafter referred to as “Mutema”]. The alleged spoliation was in respect of certain business premises situate Nyika Growth Point, Bikita, namely... More
The applicant’s legal practitioners have noted an appeal against the order granted on 23 February, 2011 dismissing her application. They have requested for the reasons for the dismissal of the application. These are they. The applicant was initially a self-actor. She appeared in person on 2 February 2011 and applied for the postponement of the matter to enable her to secure legal representation. I duly granted her the indulgence which she had sought and postponed the hearing to 23 February 2011. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against an order by this court declining condonation for late noting of an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
On the 19th May, 2010 after hearing an appeal by Applicant this court reserved judgment which judgment was then delivered on the 3rd December, 2010. More
This is an application for bail pending appeal. The application is opposed by the state on the grounds that there are no reasonable prospects of success on appeal against both conviction and sentence. More
1. On 1 November 1982, plaintiff was invited by City of Harare to submit an offer to purchase stand 7520 Salisbury Township, known as 37 Benghazi Road. More
