This is an application made in terms of Order 33 r 256 of the High Court Rules, for review, of the first defendant’s decision. The applicant sought an order on the following terms:
1. The ruling by first respondent allowing third respondent to mine on applicant’s mining location known as Dulana 45, registration number 21483, be and is hereby set aside. More
The applicant has been charged with 4 counts of armed robbery as defined in s 126 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act. The allegations are as detailed in the form 242 wherein it is alleged that he and his co-accused persons are alleged to have
i. On the 24 July 2020 around 2220hrs robbed a family at 40 Longfords Street Queensdale Harare whilst armed with a shot gun and pistols and stole cash in the sum of US$1473-00 a Samsung cellphone with an Econet line/indicated a Huawei YG cellphone Sonny Ericsson cell phone and various other... More
This is an application for review by the applicant. The basis for the application is that the respondent company hastily concluded negotiations pertaining to his exit from his job to the extent that he felt that he was coerced into accepting the final settlement which saw him exiting the respondent company .It is therefore his prayer that this court directs the respondent company to renegotiate his exit package. More
This is an application for reinstatement of an application for quantification of damages. Preliminary issues were raised on behalf of the respondent before the main application could be argued. More
This judgment is in respect of an application for review (LC/H/REV/75/19 and an appeal (LC/H/170/19) filed by the applicant/appellant on the 7th August, 2019.
Respondents raised preliminary issues in respect of both and it is these, that this judgment addresses.
Applicant was employed as headmaster under the 2nd respondent and was based at Chibara Primary School. More
The applicant is a Zimbabwean citizen and the holder of a Zimbabwean passport issued in 2000. The passport expired on 18 June 2010. Since then he has been attempting to renew it without success.
The second respondent is the Registrar General of Citizenship whose office is responsible for the issuing and renewal of passports. More
This matter was heard on 24 March 2011. On 31 March 2011 this court issued an order in the following terms:
“IT IS DECLARED THAT:
1. The applicant is a citizen of Zimbabwe by birth in terms of section 5 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
2. The provisions of section 9(7) of the Citizenship of Zimbabwe Act, Chapter 4:01 insofar as it relates to citizenship by birth, are ultra vires the powers the powers vested in the Parliament of Zimbabwe in terms of section 9 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe and are in consequence of no force and effect. More
This is an application for condonation to enable the applicant to file its appeal against the decision of the labour officer out of time.
The respondent raised a preliminary point and argued that the new Amendment Act No. 5/2015 does not allow for the procedure adopted by the applicant. The new provisions do not provide for an appeal against the decision of a labour officer nor for an application to the Labour Court. It was argued that the Labour Court is a creature of statute and cannot do anything outside the four corners of the parent Act. The Labour Act... More
This is an appeal against the decision of National Employment Council Appeals Committee that was issued on the 20 February 2014. The National Employment Committee ruled in the respondent’s favour and ordered as follows;
“1. That the charge of Part C (23) is hereby set aside and substituted with Part A (4) which is for “Negligent performance of duties with minor consequences” and which warrants a verbal warning on first breach
2. Reinstatement is to be effected from the date of the National Employment Council’s determination and it is without back pay.
3. Alternatively, the employer can pay damages in... More
The facts of the case are as follows:
The appellant is in the business of providing security (guards). On or about the 22nd of May 2012 one of the appellant’s clients raised an alarm. This meant that something was wrong. The respondent was on duty. He was party to a team that went tocheck the premises in question. Two other people who included a driver were the other members of that team. Upon arrival at the scene it was observed that the main gate or entrance to the premises was locked. However, the screen door to the building-which door is... More
This is an appeal against a decision of the Negotiating Committee handed down on the 3rd October, 2011 by which the Appellant was ordered to reinstate he Respondent without loss of salary and benefits from the date of dismissal. More
The plaintiff claims from the defendant payment of the sum of US$1 517 465-00, reduced to US$1 461 000-00 by an amendment to the summons and declaration, and finally to US$1 014 483-00 at trial. The claim is for damages for breach of contract. The nature of such damages is not finely pleaded. They are supposed to be consequential or anticipatory damages flowing from the alleged breach. More
The applicant is facing a charge of possession of a specially protected animal species. It is alleged that on 5 January 2021 and at around 1100 hours the applicant who was in the company of four other accused persons who are still at large were driving a Toyota Corolla vehicle Registration Number ACW 2580 silver in colour and they parked it along Harare-Mutare Highway at Hwedza turn off, Rusape. They were intercepted by police detectives and they were found in possession of two live pangolins. The pangolins were placed on the back seat covered with a white sack. The applicant... More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against my judgment of 18 March 2016 in which I dismissed an application for condonation of late filing of an appeal.
The 189 applicants are former employees of the respondent who were each employed at different times in various capacities. They were retrenched on 30 June 2010 following each applicant signing a retrenchment agreement. Such agreements were duly approved by the Retrenchment Board on 12 July 2010 and each applicant was paid their dues. More
It is not clear who is alleged to have violated the afore-quoted provisions. Was
it the respondent? Further it is not clear how the provisions were allegedly violated. This raised questions about the validity of the Notice of Appeal. The notice is required to have cognizable grounds of appeal. The notice in casu is very vague to say the least. Such notice should not leave the Court to speculate on what it is that the appellant requires to be determined by the Court. It is the duty of the appellant to set out clear, concise and cognizable grounds of appeal.... More
