This is an appeal against an arbitral award which declared the dismissal of respondent unfair and set it aside whilst ordering reinstatement or alternatively damages in lieu of reinstatement. More
The plaintiffs issued summons against the defendant claiming payment of a total sum of US$480 000.00, collection commission and costs of suit on the attorney-client scale. More
The four respondents are former employees of the appellant company. Each one of them was dismissed. Upon reference of the matter to arbitration, the Learned Arbitrator found that they had been unfairly dismissed and ordered their respective reinstatements with alternative orders for payment of quantified amounts of damages. Aggrieved by the arbitrator’s decision the appellant appealed to this Court on the following grounds with respect to each of the respondents. More
This is a chamber application brought in terms of r 348 A (5b) of the High Court Rules 1971. The applicant seeks the postponement or suspension of the sale in execution of a certain piece of land situate in the district of Salisbury called the remainder of Subdivision C of lot 6 of lots 190, 191, 193, 194 and 195 Highlands Estate of Welmoed measuring 4377 square meters. More
This judgment disposes of 2 applications. HC 11349/17 is an application made by Puwayi Chiutsi (Chiutsi), a legal practitioner and officer of this court and as such occupying a very privileged position in the justice delivery system, for an order setting aside theconfirmation of the sale in execution of his house in Highlands Harare in pursuance of a judgment of this court granted on 4 November 2014 in favour of Elliot Rodgers, a former client of Chiutsi, in the sum of $70 000-00. In HC 2650/18 is an application for a declaratur brought by Elliot Rodgers against the Sheriff of... More
On the 30th of August 2022, the applicant filed what he termed, “Court application for rescission of judgment in terms of common law on the grounds of fraud and error”. The application was strenuously opposed by the 1st and 2nd respondents. On the 18th of October 2022, the 1st respondent not only filed his notice of opposition and opposing affidavit. He also filed a counter application seeking an order for a decree of perpetual silence against the applicant. Both applications were set down for the 17th of March 2023. For ease of reference, I will maintain the same citation of... More
It is not usual that the judge writes a full judgment in an application for default judgment. The usual procedure for recording a default is to simply grant default judgment and make note of reasons for default. In casu, the default judgment was granted on account of the non-appearance of counsel and their clients. When a court considers it necessary to express its displeasure with the parties and counsel’s conduct of proceedings, a judgment is advised because the court speaks through its judgment. More
On 21 May 2021, upon the matter being called, the second respondent’s counsel stood up to advise that he has instructions to apply for my recusal. No prior notice or indication had been given to me as usual practice which counsel adopt. Counsel usually approach the judge whose recusal will be sought in chambers to alert the judge beforehand that his or her recusal is sought. This salutary practice is done to avoid taking the judge by surprise because in a recusal application, the judge must answer the application because it is directed at the judge. Fore warning the judge... More
This is an urgent application seeking a final order committing 1st and 2nd respondents to imprisonment for contempt of court. It also seeks to interdict the 3rd and 4th respondents from confiscating the applicants Motor Vehicle being a Mercedes Benz S320 registration No. 825-412L, Chassis No. WDB220652A 114144, Engine No. 11294430690891 and costs of suit.In the interim the applicant seeks an interdict barring 3rd and 4th respondents from interfering or dispossessing the applicant of the said motor vehicle. He further seeks an order for the immediate release of the motor vehicle from seizure in terms of the Customs and Exercise... More
The general principle is that an applicant facing criminal charges is entitled to bail pending trial unless there are compelling reasons to deny him bail. Applicant is facing a charge of robbery in contravention of section 126 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act (Chapter 9:23). The applicant denies the charges and contends that he is a proper candidate for bail. The state opposes this application More
The applicant owed the second respondent the sum of US$327 345.77 plus interest thereon at the rate of fifty percent per annum. On a date that is not material, the second respondent obtained judgment in the High Court against the applicant for the payment of the debt together with the accrued interest.
The applicant failed to satisfy the judgment debt. In due course, the first respondent attached the applicant’s farm and sold it by public auction. The sale realised the sum of US$205 000.00. The applicant successfully objected to the sale. The first respondent set the sale aside, accepting that... More
MAKONESE J: The applicant is facing two counts of attempted murder as defined in section 189 as read with section 47 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act (Chapter) 9:23. The applicant avers that he is a suitable candidate for bail pending his trial.
The state alleges that on the 6th of November 2020 and at Magedini Business Centre, Lusulu Binga he assaulted the 1st complainant above the left eye with a machete causing a deep cut. Applicant went further to assault 2nd complainant Mashoko Ncube with the same machete on the head causing him a deep cut. Applicant... More
Did the applicant in this matter set out, in the founding affidavit, facts that distinguish the case from others to justify the granting of the order for urgent hearing without breach of the principle that similarly situated litigants are entitled to be treated alike? See Mayor Logistics Private Limited v Zimbabwe Revenue Authority1. More
The facts of this matter are common cause. The appellant and thefirst respondent are companies duly incorporated in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe. On 22 June 2007, the second respondent published a forfeiture notice in terms of which part of the notice related to mining claim number 26736, known as Mutuwi. The mining claim was registered in the name of an entity known as Dimension Stone Quarries (Private) Limited. The notice stated that the mining location had on 20June 2007 been forfeited in terms of the Mines and Minerals Act [Chapter 21:05] (the Act). It also stated that it... More
This is a chamber application in which the applicant seeks relief in the following terms:
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this Honourable Court, if any, why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. The provisional order herein be and is hereby confirmed.
2. The respondent, its employees and all those claiming occupation of the boundaries falling within applicant’s claim number 26736BM be and are hereby ordered to vacate from the boundaries of the claim within five (5) days of this order.
3. In the event of the respondent failing to... More
