Applicant applied to this Court for the review of his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The application was made in terms of Section 89(1) d1 of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 as read together with Rule 20 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017.
Respondent opposed the application.
At the onset of oral argument, applicant raised 2 (two) points in limine which shall be addressed
ad seriatim. More
The following is common cause. The 2nd respondent purchased from the 3rd respondent stand number 46 Murombedzi Growth Point, Murombedzi ‘the property’. The 3rd respondent is a Rural District Council. They entered into a lease with an option to buy agreement. On the 26th of May 2015 the 2nd respondent sold the property to the applicant in the sum of US$3 600.00. It was agreed as between the parties that, US$1 800.00 shall be paid in cash to the 2nd respondent on signature. The balance of US$1 800.00 was payable to the 3rd respondent to clear all outstanding arrears for... More
Appellant’s grounds of appeal read as follows;
“The Respondent was wrong in erring that I was sitting on a final warning before the alleged offence was committed.
I was never brought to a hearing where the Disciplinary Committee came up with a final warning. It is disputed.
The Respondent in terminating my services never got lenient given that I had served the company for nearly 20 years without any problem.
I feel it was really constructive dismissal as I was not reprimanded. If Respondent considered my service I would have either given a final warning or demotion either to general... More
The plaintiffs are husband and wife. On 26 February 2008, they issued summons out of this court seeking the declaration of nullity on the agreement executed between them and the second defendant with respect to number 45 Maviyani Street Mbare, Harare; the setting aside of the cession effected over the same property by the third defendant to the second defendant and costs of suit. The first and second defendants contested the action and in addition the second defendant filed a counterclaim seeking the eviction of the plaintiffs and all those claiming right of occupation through them together with costs on... More
There is a long standing dispute between the parties over the ownership of house no 372 Engineering, Highfield. Applicant avers in his founding affidavit that the house belonged to Luka Meda, the applicant’s grandfather. Luka Meda died intestate in 1989 and his estate was registered with the Master of the High Court in 1994 under DR389/94. Applicant’s father, Raphael Chirimuuta was appointed executor dative of the estate and he was issued with Letters of Administration for purposes of effecting cession of the rights, title and interest in the house into his name. He died before effecting transfer of the house... More
Siansimba is a campsite in the Zambezi Valley. It is owned by the second respondent. The second respondent is a statutory body set up in terms of the Parks and Wildlife Act (Chapter 20:14). It has multiple functions. They include, inter alia, the power or obligation to control, manage and maintain national parks, botanical gardens, sanctuaries, and recreational parks for the purposes specified in that Act. In this application, the applicant seeks a number of interim interdicts against the respondents. Against the first respondent, a private company duly incorporated in accordance with the laws of this country, the applicant seeks... More
This judgment relates to two related applications which were argued together. The parties are the same in both matters. Case Number HC 12470/11 is an application for condonation of the failure to file an application for the setting aside of the default judgment granted in Case Number HC 9545/11 within the period provided for in r 63(1) of the Rules of this Court. Case Number HC 12471/11 is the application for the rescission of the default judgment referred to above. More
This judgment is in respect of two matters which were argued before me. Case No. HC 12469/11 is an application for the rescission of a judgment given in default of the applicant in Case No. HC 3729/09.Case No. HC12468/11is an application for condonation of the applicant’s failure to file the application for rescission of judgment viz. HC 12469/11 within the time prescribed by the Rules of this Court. After hearing argument from both counsel I dismissed the application for condonation. The effect of that was that there was no application for rescission of judgment properly before the Court, hence Case... More
On the night of 25 October 2006 the plaintiff, a farmer in Chegutu, was driving a Landrover Defender motor vehicle registration number AAU 0482 which is a 1996 model along Prince Edward approaching Lezard Avenue in Milton Park Harare at about 23:00 hours, when he beheld a Leyland Truck registration number AAA 4555 belonging to the second defendant from a distance of about 10 metres. More
The issue for determination in casu is whether or not service of a petition on respondent’s legal practitioner is proper service in terms of the Electoral Act [Cap 2:13] (“the Act”). I want to quickly state that an affirmative answer to the issue raised depends on whether or not there is clear evidence that the respondent chose that course. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against a judgment of this Court Judgment Number LCH 369/23. It is being made in terms of r43 of the Rules of this Court 2017 (the Rules) as read with s92F(2) of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 (the Act). It is opposed. More
The respondent, which was the plaintiff in the court a quo issued summons against the appellant (respondent in the court a quo) seeking an order evicting the respondent from the immovable property known as stand number 442, Gaza Township, Chipinge. This property was allegedly owned by the late Bayeni Hardwell Chiororo who died on 22 December 2004. The property is now part of the deceased’s estate. Joseph Chiororo was duly appointed executor of this estate. More
This is an application for condonation for noncompliance with the Labour Court Rules, 2017. The applicant seeks to file his notice of appeal out of time. He is out of time by 391 days. The applicant stated that he received the decision he is seeking to appeal against in December 2021.
In January 2022 he noted his appeal against his employer’s decision to find him guilty and to dismiss him. The appeal was defective. He then filed an application to reinstate the appeal but this too was fatally defective. It was struck of the roll sometime in September 2022. On... More
The appellant, Paul Mgodi, who was a respondent in an application for an interdict in the court below, was interdicted from developing or causing the development of Stand 1484 Chirundu. The applicant, was Duweni Kutepa and is the first respondent herein. His averments in seeking that interdict were that sometime in 2015 he had been offered a commercial stand, being Stand 1484 Chrirundu by Chirundu Local Board, the second respondent herein. This had been through a letter dated 4 December 2014 which he annexed to his application. He averred that he had since paid the purchase price inclusive of all... More
