This is an appeal against the decision of the Respondent’s Appeals Committee, which upheld the decision of the Disciplinary Committee, in terms of which Appellant was found guilty of misconduct and dismissed from employment. More
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 and Defendant were married on 3 January 2007 under the then Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11] now the Marriages Act [Chapter 5:17]. No children were born out of this union. On 23 November 2021, the Plaintiff sued out summons claiming a decree of divorce and ancillary relief. In her declaration, she stated that the marriage between the parties has irretrievably broken down, and there are no reasonable prospects of restoration of a normal marriage relationship. She proposed that movable properties including the motor vehicle bought during the subsistence of the marriage be sold and the proceeds be shared equally.... 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 parties herein married in 1999. The plaintiff, Rutendo Tandi, seeks divorce from the defendant, Theresa Tandi on the grounds of irretrievable down of their marriage. There are two children from the marriage both of whom have reached the age of majority. It is also common cause that the plaintiff is in agreement that the two immovable properties that are already in his wife’s name should be retained by her. The parties are also agreed in general that household movables acquired during their marriage should go to the defendant save for contestation regarding two motor vehicles. 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
DUBE-BANDA J:
[1] The applicant seeks a declaratory order to the effect that she is the lawful and sole owner of stand number 1025 Strathaven, Harare, (“stand”) and that any sale or disposal of the stand unlawful, null and void.
[2] The application is opposed by the first, third and fourth respondents. The third respondent is Milivic Housing Trust for convenience it shall be hereinafter as the “Trust”. The second respondent (“Makari James”) filed an affidavit, whose net effect is in support of the application. After hearing arguments and at the stage of writing this judgment, it occurred to me... 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
