Appellant was aggrieved by an arbitral award wherein the Arbitrator found that Respondent had been unfairly dismissed and ordered his reinstatement with full pay and benefits or alternatively that he be paid his back pay and damages in lieu of reinstatement. More
Both matters were disposed of on the basis of a concession made that the facts in respect of each case did not disclose an offence. What follows are the reasons for the order made on that day striking both matters off the roll. More
This application was dismissed on the date of hearing. A request has been made for reasons for the dismissal.These are they.
Applicant is facing a charge of raping his employee. Applicant is alleged to have raped the complainant who was employed as a housemaid. After the rape the complainant sent a text message to her mother and reported to the police. Applicant was arrested. He indicated that he was employed by the Ministry of Health and Child Care as a Male Circumcision Mobilizer at Nyadire Mission Hospital, Mutoko. He was placed on remand and on 26 August, 2022, an application... More
The applicant applied for bail pending trial before FOROMA J on 26 June, 2020. The application was dismissed on 24 July, 2020. The reasons for judgment are contained in judgment HH 486/20. That judgment sets out the background to the case. I will however briefly refresh on the background so that this judgement is understood in context. It is also noted that there is a further background to the application which FOROMA J did not deal with but is relevant to the bail applications. More
On 26 May 2022, a default judgment was handed down in case number HC 6499/21. First respondent was the plaintiff in that matter. The default order declared her to be the surviving spouse of the deceased Alexander Makwena entitling her to inherit in the deceased’s estate and ordered second and third respondents to include her in the final administration account and distribution plan. The present application was filed on 6 October 2022. More
This is an urgent chamber application for an order interdicting the respondent from instituting a suitability inquiry in respect of the applicant pending determination of the court application for review filed by the applicant under case No. HC 6543/18. The application is opposed by the respondent.
The convoluted facts of this matter are that in 2014 the applicant instituted an application for review under Case No. HC 10614/14. The respondent, who was also the respondent in that matter failed to file his notice of opposition timeously. Respondent then filed an application for condonation and extension of the time within which... More
“Appellant in this matter was employed as a standby driver for a period of four years. On the 3rd of January 2015, appellant was called to ferry employees on standby from the mine to slymes dam. On that particular day it was raining heavily and appellant went to the slymes dam on two occasions without any problem. On the third occasion the car stopped in the midst of stagnant water caused by heavy rains. Appellant was charged by respondent on allegations of gross incompetence and he was dismissed at the initial hearing and the appeals committee upheld the verdict.” More
This is an appeal against the judgment by the Gweru magistrates court delivered on 28 June 2011. The magistrates court dismissed appellant’s application for variation (downward) of a maintenance order passed by the Harare magistrates court on 31 June 2010 in which appellant was ordered to pay $US240,00 per month as maintenance for the two minor children in addition to payment of school fees, purchase of school uniforms and casual wear. More
The applicants approached this court on a certificate of urgency, seeking spoliatory relief on an interim basis and declaratory and interdictory relief in the final against the respondents.
At the hearing the respondents raised various points in limineviz:
(i) Whether the applicants had locus standi to seek protection of the court;
(ii) Whether the deponents to the founding affidavits had authority;
(iii) Whether spoilatory relief was available to the applicants when they allege more than possession i.e. go into the merits of the possession;
(iv) Whether the matter is urgent;
(v) That there are serious disputes of fact; and
(vi)... More
The applicants filed two applications, one for condonation of late filing of an application for rescission of judgment and the other for rescission of judgment. The court, for expediency and in exercising its discretion conferred to it, in terms of r 4C of the High Court Rules, 1971, directed that the applications be argued one after the other and indicated that the judgements in the matters would be dealt with in one judgement. For ease of reference, the court will refer to the first application as “the application for condonation’’ and the second as “the application for rescission”. More
This is an application for summary judgment against the three respondents who are the defendants in Case No. HC 8904/10 (hereinafter referred to as “the main matter” or “the action”). The applicant is the plaintiff in the main matter, in which it instituted proceedings for the ejectment of the respondents from the assistant manager’s house at Good Hope Farm. The facts which underlie the dispute between the parties are as follows: More
The applicant employed the respondent as its Group Audit Manager. In that capacity she enjoyed the benefit of the use of a company motor vehicle, a Mazda Familiar, registration number AAM 7769 (“the vehicle”). The vehicle remained the property of the applicant. More
This appeal was filed by appellant on 19 September 2014 and respondent was invited to file a response but did not do so. Since then nothing has happened on the matter making it eligible to be decided under section 89 (2) (a) 1 of the Labour Act. The issue between the parties was about factual arguments on the respondents underpayments and entitlements. Arbitrator ruled that the respondent had a good case. More
At the hearing of this matter, a point in limine was taken that the Appellant was improperly before the Court in that it was approaching the Court with dirty hands.
It was submitted that in terms of law, the noting of an appeal does not suspend the decision appealed against. More
This is an appeal against the decision of an arbitrator sitting at Harare. The Learned Arbitrator after assessing the facts placed before him dismissed the appellant’s claim for lack of merit. The sole ground on which this appeal is based is that:
“The honourable Arbitrator erred in differentiating similar cases and disregards the precedence (sic) set by the Labour Court which is superior than the Arbitrator”
In this case the appellant asserted that the Arbitrator failed to follow precedent. The Arbitrator on the other hand considered the specific facts of this matter. Thereafter they made a determination in terms of... More
