The plaintiff claims against the defendants jointly and severally, the one paying the other to be absolved, payment of the sum of US$3 000. The basis for claiming the said amount is framed in the following terms: “being the amount the defendants undertook to pay Plaintiff for his participation and role in the HIV and AIDS documentary ‘Pain in My Heart’, which despite demand, the defendants have refused, neglected and /or failed to pay.” The plaintiff contends that the claim is based on a verbal agreement entered into between the parties in early 2007 in which agreement the second defendant... More
The first and second applicants have been embroiled in a dispute with the first respondent from as far back as 2019. At the center of their dispute is a piece of land which is known as Subdivision 2 of Erling Farm, Seke, Beatrice {‘the farm’}. On 1 October 2021, the dispute in which only the first respondent, on the one hand, and the first and the second applicants, on the other, were involved escalated itself to the third to twenty-fifth applicants whom the first respondent moved to evict from the farm together with the first and second applicants. He premised... More
Initially this matter came as an appeal. The accused was appealing against sentence in respect of count 2. However, we could not proceed to deal with it as an appeal because of the procedural irregularity that we then noted. We then dealt with it as a review in terms of s 26 of the High Court Act [Cap 7:06]. Consequently no submissions were then made by both the appellant and respondent in respect of the appeal against sentence. More
This is an appeal against the determination of the respondent’s Disciplinary Authority, which found the appellant guilty of misconduct and dismissed him from employment. More
1. This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Magistrates Court in terms whereof the appellants were convicted of 3 counts of criminal abuse of duty as public officers as defined in s 174(1)(a) of the Criminal Law Code and, with all counts treated as one for the purposes of sentence, each appellant was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment of which 12 months imprisonment was suspended for 5 years on the usual conditions of good behaviour. More
This is an application for condonation for late noting of an appeal against the decision of the DA who ruled that there was nothing for him to determine if regard is had to the fact that the employer had paid the employee all that was due to him and that the Unionist had collected such dues for onward transmission to the applicant More
This is a provisional sentence matter. Plaintiff issued provisional sentence summons against the defendant claiming provisional sentence in an amount of US$208 000,00, together interest at the prescribed rate from the date of acknowledgment of debt to the date of payment in full. More
Sometime before 20 July, 2012 the applicants and the first respondent were embroiled in a Labour dispute. The dispute centred on non-payment of salaries, or wages, which were due to the applicants and unfair dismissal of employees by the first respondent. More
This is a Court Application for dismissal of respondent’s action under case number HC 6448/18 made in terms of r 75(1) of the High Court Rules of 1971 coupled with a claim for a declaratory order on the ground that their claim is frivolous and vexatious. More
On the date of the hearing applicant raised a point in limine on the locus standi of second respondent and the fact that applicant had not been served personally with the application for contempt of court that led to the default judgment.
The second respondent’s counsel on the other hand also raised a point in limine alleging that as the applicant had not attached the default judgment in question, there was no cause of action.
After counsel had made their respective submissions I indicated that they must proceed with arguments on the main matter and my decision of the points... More
On the 5th of May 2020 the applicant was arrested on allegations of robbery in contravention of section 126 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act (Chapter 9:23). Applicant appeared on an initial remand on the 7th of May 2020. He was remanded in custody and is currently lodged at Khami Prison. The state opposes the application for bail. Applicant denies the allegations against him and contends that he was nowhere near the crime scene on the day of the robbery. More
This is a court application for the placement of the first respondent under corporate rescue proceedings in terms of s 121 as read with ss 124 and 131 of the Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07]. The application is opposed by the first respondent. More
The facts in this appeal are common cause. Respondents are employed by the appellant in various capacities. The dispute between the parties arises from the provisions of transport allowances for the respondents. More
This appeal raises one issue, whether an application for exemption made in terms of Statutory Instrument 102 of 2014, The Collective Bargaining Agreement: Welfare and Educational Institutions, suspends the obligation to pay the promulgated salaries and benefits
The background to this case is not in dispute. Statutory Instrument 57 of 2013 Collective Bargaining Agreement: Welfare and Educational Institutions was promulgated gazetting the applicable minimum wages for the period 1 May to 31 August 2009. The appellant had not effected any increments for respondents together with the other employees. It was not in dispute that the employees were entitled to backpays... More
Applicant applied for the review and reversal of 2nd respondent’s determination date-stamped 20 March 2015. Respondent/s opposed the application. The determination is filed of record. In the main it endorsed the “exemption agreement” between the employer (Peterhouse) and 129 employees wherein the parties agreed to waive stipulated wages. More
