In this matter I have to exercise the court’s powers to rescind its order. The background facts are as follows:
1. On 2 November, 2016, the applicant filed an application for bail pending appeal following his conviction by the Regional Magistrate Eastern Division on a charge of rape as defined in s 65 (1) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act, [Chapter 9:23]. He was sentenced to 12 years imprisonment with 3 years thereof suspended on the usual conditions of good behaviour. More
This judgment addresses applications for condonation for late filing of applications for review and appeal by 2 employees of Golden Valley Mine namely Shadreck Mkuwu in LC/H/278/23 and Godknows Dube LC/H/277/23. On account of the fact that the matters deal with the same subject and that the relief sought is the same the parties to the matters requested that both matters be consolidated and be decided as a single matter. In the result the court ordered by consent on 19 July 2023 that the 2 matters be consolidated. This judgment therefore addresses the matters in their consolidated form. The parties... More
This judgment addresses applications for condonation for late filing of applications for review and appeal by 2 employees of Golden Valley Mine namely Shadreck Mkuwu in LC/H/278/23 and Godknows Dube LC/H/277/23. On account of the fact that the matters deal with the same subject and that the relief sought is the same the parties to the matters requested that both matters be consolidated and be decided as a single matter. In the result the court ordered by consent on 19 July 2023 that the 2 matters be consolidated. This judgment therefore addresses the matters in their consolidated form. The parties... More
The background facts are that in 1997, the applicants were suspended from work without pay pending an application to the Ministry of Labour for the dismissal from work after they participated in a collective job action. A Labour Relations Officer ordered reinstatement without loss of salary and benefits. The respondent appealed against that decision to a Senior Labour Relations officer. The appeal was successful and the Senior Labour Relations Officer granted permission for the applicants’ dismissal but ordered the respondent to pay applicants their terminal benefits within 15 days of receipt of the determination. The applicants ultimately appealed to the... More
The plaintiff’s pleadings are a mess. They do not comply with the strict requirements of the High Court rules. The face of the summons does not identify the 13 others. The declaration does not do so either. In addition it does not comply with the rules of court. It contains extraneous information and is argumentative in nature. A letter of suspension, three death certificates, a burial order and the Supreme Court judgment SC 66/02 concerning the plaintiff and the second defendant are attached to the declaration. It is in the format of a founding affidavit rather than a declaration. When... More
This urgent chamber application involves a wrangle between two couples. Central to the dispute is a piece of land sold to the applicants by the respondents. I set the matter down for hearing on 16 March 2020. It seemed a settlement was well-nigh possible. I postponed the matter to 18 March 2021 to accord the parties more time to discuss. On 18 March 2021, the parties came back with gloves off. They were all set for legal combat. More
This is a contested action in which the plaintiff seeks damages for defamation in the sum of US$20 000-00, interest thereon from 21 July 2009, being the date on which summons was issued, to the date of payment in full and costs of suit. More
The plaintiff and defendant started living together as husband and wife in terms of customary law in 1988. On 4 June 1993 their union was solemnised in terms of the Marriages Act [Cap 5:11]. The marriage still subsists. More
“ Heads of argument referred to in subrule (2) shall be filed by the respondent’s legal practitioner not more than ten days after the heads of argument of the applicant or excipient, as the case may be, were delivered to the respondent in terms of subrule (1):
Provided that- More
The appellants were employed by the respondent as security guards until their dismissal in 2021 when they instituted unfair dismissal claims with the National Employment Council for the Medical and Allied Industry. The appellants claimed that the respondent erred in directing them to join an outsourced company and terminating their contracts on notice. The dispute was presided over and determined by an N.E.C designated agent who ruled that the respondent pay to each appellant USD 11 084 or its equivalent in Zimbabwe currency plus costs. The ruling of the designated agent was not complied with. More
At the conclusion of the oral submissions the Court dismissed the appeal stating that the reasons would follow. The following are the reasons.
Appellant was employed by the Respondent. He is alleged to have been arrested whilst in possession of a quartzite stone. A subsequent Disciplinary Committee hearing found him guilty and he was dismissed. More
The applicant is a Pakistan national who has been resident in Zimbabwe under the cover of a temporary employment issued by the first respondent on 7 June 2008. He has since been involved by way of employment in the purification and bottling of drinking water. He has done so in partnership with others. In May 2010 he and his partners obtained an investment licence in terms of the Zimbabwe Investment Authority Act [Cap 14:30]. Thereafter he sought to submit an application for a residence permit as an investor. He was advised that his file was missing and that he must... More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court handed down on 24 September 2018 wherein it granted the first respondent’s claim against the appellant. More
On 12 November 2015 applicants filed an application for condonation for late filing of an application for review. The founding affidavit was deposed to by 1st applicant. 11 affidavits were filed in support of the founding affidavit. Applicants place the blame for not complying with the rules of Court on their erstwhile legal practitioner who renounced agency. On 25 November 2015 respondents filed their notice of opposition. They raised a point in limine that first respondent was improperly cited as there is no office of an appeals chairman at the 2nd Respondent. An appeals committee is appointed on an ad... More
