This is an appeal against an arbitral award made in favour of the Respondent. The Appellant was ordered to reinstate the Respondent with payment of damages in lieu of reinstatement as an alternative. More
The plaintiff’s claim against the defendant is for the sum of US$14 287 in respect of which the defendant signed an acknowledgment of debt. The plaintiff contends that the said amount is due to it for cigarettes sold by it to the defendant. The defendant on the other hand alleges that the acknowledgment of debt relied upon is a forgery and denies being indebted to the plaintiff. More
The appellant filed a claim in the court a quo, against the respondent whereby she was claiming payment of the sum of US$1 149-00 being the balance in respect of goods advanced to and received by the respondent on credit. The claim was contested on the basis that the respondent owed the appellant much less as she had paid some of the money and returned some of the goods. The respondent conceded to owing the appellant US$380-00. After a full trial, the magistrate made an order that the respondent pays the applicant the amount the respondent admitted owing and absolution... More
This is a combined application for condonation for late noting an application for rescission of a default judgment and an application for rescission of a default judgment in terms of r 27 of the High Court Rules, 2021. More
The plaintiff in this matter claims payment in the sum of $8,150,000.00 by way of damages sustained by her arising from an assault allegedly perpetrated by members of the Zimbabwe National Army on the 4th of June 2003 in Glenview, Harare. The plaintiff avers that the soldiers in question were at the relevant time acting within the course and scope of their employment and that the defendant is therefore vicariously liable for their actions. More
The plaintiff’s claim in this matter, as amended, is for damages in the sum of $2.5 billion as the current market value of the immovable property that was sold to the plaintiff through the defendant. In the alternative, she claims repayment of the purchase price of $220 million paid to the defendant together with interest at varying rates. The defendant denies liability in respect of both main and alternative claims. More
: This is a court application for review made in terms of s 26 of the High Court Act, [Chapter 7:06] as read with Order 33 of the high Court Rules. 1971. The grounds for review are given as follows:
1. “The learned magistrate grossly erred at law and in fact in concluding that the default was wilful when the applicant was in court just after the default was passed. That the applicant saw that first respondent still at court.
2. The learned magistrate grossly erred in failing to treat this matter with fairness and the applicant was in wilful... More
This is an appeal against the decision by Respondent’s Group Chief Executive confirming the dismissal of Appellant from employment. The brief facts are that Appellant was at the time of the dismissal employed by the Respondent as an export Manager but assigned to Respondent’s subsidiary in Malawi as its Managing Director. Appellant was charged and found guilty More
The parties married on 13 December 1992 in terms of the Marriage Act [Cap 5:11]. Two children were born of the marriage, Diana Musonza (born 24 March 1993) and Tafadzwa Musonza (born 24 January 2000). The parties resided at number 3 Dunmore Avenue Queensdale. The marriage was an unhappy one filled with physical and emotional abuse. The plaintiff left home on numerous occasions but always returned in the hope that the marriage would work. In October 2006 however things came to a head and plaintiff decided that she had had enough. The plaintiff moved out of the matrimonial home and... More
2. The dispute in this matter revolves around the question of the right to rule the Chimombe clan. The wrangle highlights the issue which has been vexing the court a quo for some time. Various decisions have emanated from the High Court on whether or not they have the jurisdiction to determine matters relating to chieftainship disputes.
3. The appellant was appointed as Chief Chimombe in terms of the Traditional Leaders Act [Chapter 29:17]. The date of his appointment is not apparent from the papers. He is currently the substantive Chief Chimombe. In 2010, following the appellant’s appointment as Chief,... More
On 27 July 2013, and at around 1730, the appellant was driving a Toyota Corolla along Samora Machel Road due east. The now deceased was cycling also due east between the yellow carriage marking and the verge of the road. The appellant hit the deceased with her vehicle. More
This is an appeal against an arbitrator’s decision where he dismissed the appellant’s claim for constructive dismissal by the respondent company.
Facts of the case are that the appellant who was in the respondent’s employ as a key accounts manager resigned from employment after he had been transferred by the respondent to work at one of its subsidiaries. It was the appellant’s view that the transfer was a demotion and instead of reporting to the new station he resigned in protest to the transfer. After the resignation, he approached the arbitrator with a claim of constructive dismissal and payment of... More
This is an application for review of the Master’s decision regarding the resolution a dispute using s 68G of the Administration of Estates Act [Chapter 6:01] which deals with whether customary law should apply to a deceased person’s estate. Having decided that customary law should apply, the essence of the Master’s decision, (cited as the first respondent in this matter), was to reduce the applicant’s civil marriage to a customary one in accordance with s 68(4) of the Administration of Estates. This was on the basis that at the time the civil marriage was contracted, the now deceased was married... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award granted on 19 December 2014, in terms of which the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent an acting allowance in the total amount of US$3 647-78.
The factual background to the matter is common cause. The respondent is employed by the appellant as a clerk/typist. That is his substantive post. He worked as a Committee Clerk, in an acting capacity, from October 2010 to June 2012. He was further assigned to act as Private Secretary to the Director of Finance, from July 2012 to July 2014.
For the extra responsibilities, he... More
