The Respondent was the Applicant’s credit controller from 18 September, 2009. The Applicant paid the Respondent agreed wages from September to November, 2009. From December, 2009, the Applicant stopped paying the wages. No wages were paid for the whole of 2010. Instead Applicant was giving the Respondent a transport allowance. On 5 February, 2011, the Respondent approached the Applicant, asking for the outstanding wages. The Applicant refused to pay him. The Respondent referred the issue to a labour officer who referred the issue to arbitration. More
The applicant instituted proceedings as a matter of urgency. The application was lodged in this Court on 15 May 2020, and heard on 29 May 2019. The final and the interim relief sought by the applicant have been formulated as follows:
“Terms of the final order sought:
1. That it be and is hereby declared that the election of the applicant is lawful as it was in consequence of section 103 (4) as read section 103 (3) (iii) of the Urban Councils Act (Chapter 29:15).
2. Alternatively, that it be and is hereby ordered that applicant’s election occurred after 2ndrespondent‘s... More
The appellant was formerly employed by the respondent. Following the termination of the relationship a dispute arose over certain amounts that he claimed as being due and owing to him. He obtained an arbitral award on 28 June 2012. On 1 October 2012 the appellant applied through the chamber book for an order for the registration of the arbitral award as an order of the High Court. The respondent opposed the application on the grounds that it was not capable of registration because a component of the award is not sounding in money and on 19 August 2015 the High... More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Magistrate’s Court in which the court a quo granted an application in favour of the 1st respondent (Mavetera) for the rectification of the register in terms of section 162 of the Companies and Other Business Entities Act (the Act) [Chapter 24:31]. More
This is an urgent chamber application for a provisional interdict.
The facts are that on 10 July 2013 I dealt with the matter on the unopposed roll. The applicant who is the first respondent in this matter had applied for a provisional sentence on a liquid document namely an acknowledgement of debt by all the respondents (some of the applicants in this matter). The draft order was headed “Order by Consent” and its first paragraph reads:- “1. The Deed of settlement under HC 4283/13 be and is hereby made an order of this Court”. I raised a query relating to... More
This matter has a long history of a dispute over the ownership of a piece of communal land, in Mayambara, Seke Communal lands. The parties to the dispute inherited the dispute from their parents. Appellant’s father and the respondent’ brother, who were the original disputants died many years ago. The matter was further confused by the lack of knowledge of the applicable law on the part of the parties and Court officials. Along the way, wrong advice was given to the parties leading to wrong decisions being given in courts More
The Appellant was dismissed by the Respondent Company on allegations of theft of money meant to be remitted to the bus company by him after conducting his bus conductor duties. A Disciplinary Committee sat over his matter and dismissed him. Aggrieved by the dismissal, he appealed to the internal appeal structures without any success. Finally he appealed to this court and it is that appeal which is the subject matter of this judgment. More
This is an appeal against conviction in which I find myself in the same situation HAWTHORN ACJ was in R v Freddy 1963 (2) SA 128 (SR) at 128-129 and R v Oscar 1963 (2) SA 134 (SR). The appeal came before my brother UCHENA J and my sister CHATUKUTA J on 27 October 2009. Their opinions differed on the matter and in accordance with the provisions of s 4(2) of the High Court Act [Cap 5:07], judgment was suspended until a third judge was present. I was the third judge. Unlike in the Freddy case, supra, I did not... More
This is an appeal against a decision by an arbitrator sitting at Bulawayo. The appellant was employed by the respondent on a fixed term basis (monthly). The operative part of the contract reads as follows:
“7. This contract will, upon the completion of the time period, terminate and no expectation of being re-engaged at any time in future should at any time be read into this contract. Termination will be automatic at the conclusion of the contract although as a common courtesy the Company will endeavour to give advanced warning of their intention to terminate and not to renew. Failure... More
Lying at the heart of this dispute in the authenticity (and therefore validity) of a will purportedly left by the late Iddah Sharai Govereh (the deceased). The date of her demise is not apparent from the papers filed of record as neither party alluded to the same. More
This matter was placed before me on a certificate of urgency in terms of Rule 242 of the High Court Rules as amended. I dismissed the application with costs because of the preliminary issues raised. The applicant has requested written reasons for my decision. These are they. More
On 21 October, 2019 at around 17:30 hours, the applicant was driving a public service vehicle, a Toyota Hiace registration number ABJ 4962 along Simon Mazorodze road, on the outer lane of the road. When he reached Mbare Police District Headquarters, the accused person knocked down the deceased, a 6 year old boy who was crossing the road from west to east. The deceased died soon after the impact. The State charged the applicant with culpable homicide and alleged that the applicant was negligent in one or more of the following particulars of negligence More
In a nutshell the dispute arose over a beneficiaries’ sharing agreement entered into by members of the Chigumba Family after the death of the head of the family Stanslas Tonderayi Chigumba (the deceased). The deceased passed on on 11 December 2006. The beneficiaries sharing agreement was entered into on 29 May 2018. The dispute is essentially between Richard Kudzanai Chigumba (the applicant in the main case) and Taurai Cliff Chigumba (the first respondent in the main case). In the counter application Taurai Cliff Chigumba is the applicant while Richard Kudzanai Chigumba is the first respondent. For expediency I will refer... More
The applicants were arraigned before the magistrates’ court facing one count of contravening section 134 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act [chapter 9.23], extortion. It was alleged that on 6 February 2009, they unlawfully obtained a vehicle from the complainant by threatening that he would be detained in police cells if the applicants were not paid the sum of $4 000-00. Both applicants denied the charge but were convicted after trial. They were each sentenced to five years imprisonment with one year suspended for five years on condition of future good behaviour. Dissatisfied with both the conviction and... More
