The applicant is a 28 year old polygamist with four wives. He is in remand prison on allegations of having raped the 13 year old complainant. The facts leading to the alleged rape are somewhat common cause. The applicant is alleged to have entered into a forced marriage with the complaint with the connivance of her father much to the chagrin of her mother. More
This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. This court dismissed an appeal by the applicant against dismissal on the basis that it had been done in terms of section 63 (e) of the Public Service Regulations, 2000, as amended. Applicant had failed to resume duty after the expiry of his suspension on 29 June 2011 and was absent from duty for a continuous period in excess of thirty days. More
This is an appeal against the dismissal of the appellant in terms of section 63 (e) of the Public Services Regulations, 2000, as amended. The appellant failed to resume duty after the expiry of his suspension on 29 June 2011 and was absent from duty for a continuous period in excess of thirty days. Section 63 (e) of the Public Service Regulations, 2000, allows the Commission or head of Ministry to discharge from the Public Service any member who:
“has been absent from duty for a continuous period in excess of thirty days without having been granted leave of absence.” More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award where the arbitrator ruled that, the Appellants were casual workers and ordered that they be paid the amounts that they were short-charged on their casual work basis. More
The parties to these divorce proceedings are in agreement that their marriage has irretrievably been broken down owing to a whole range of issues bedevilling it. They trade accusation and counter accusations on the cause of this marital disharmony. They however take no issue with its dissolution. They have also since agreed on a wide array of issues including the custody of their four minor children (which is to be awarded to the defendant) and access of the minor children by the plaintiff. More
The appellant in this case was convicted by the Magistrate, Gokwe of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm on 19 March 2002. The record of the proceedings shows that the accused pleaded guilty. Following his conviction the appellant was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment of which 9 months imprisonment was suspended on the usual conditions of good behaviour. The appellant applied for bail pending appeal which was granted three days later. He has been out on bail since then. More
This is an application forcondonation for late noting of an application for review.
When the matter came up for hearing, a preliminary point was taken by the 2nd respondent. It argued that the draft ruling being sought to be taken on review has no legal force until after its confirmation when it is made an order of the court.
The 2nd respondent submitted, in support of the preliminary point that it had raised, that the application is improperly before the court as it is based on nothing. The proceedings which are sought to be challenged cannot be taken on appeal... More
MUZOFA J: The facts of this case are largely common cause. The applicants are beneficiaries of the land reform programme. They were issued with an offer letter on 22 June 2017 by the 1st respondent over a farm known as subdivision consolidation of RE of Sigaro Farm and Gwebi Wood of Sigaro Farm in the District of Mazowe in Mashonaland Province measuring 1 804 hectares ‘the farm’. In due course they were served with a notice of intention to withdraw the offer letter. Despite objections raised, the 1st respondent withdrew the offer letter. The applicants were issued with another offer... More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Magistrates Court in terms of which the appellant was convicted of rape as defined in s 65 (1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23], and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment of which 3 years imprisonment was suspended. The appeal is against both conviction and sentence. The respondent opposes the appeal. More
The appellant together with 3 co-accused were arraigned before the Magistrate Court Mutare facing a charge of contravention of s 368 (1) as read with s 368 (4) of the Mines and Minerals Act, [Chapter 21:05] “Prospecting for minerals without a permit or licence” the appellant together with another were tried and convicted after full trial while the other 2 co-accused were found not guilty and acquitted. The appellant and the co-accused whom he was convicted with were sentenced to 2 years imprisonment being a mandatory sentence. The appellant was dissatisfied by the conviction and noted an appeal with this... More
An application in which the applicant moves the court to declare him the sole owner of the property which he and another person jointly purchased from the seller is misplaced. A fortiori when the application excludes his co-purchaser whose views remain unknown to the court More
The Appellant called at his supervisor’s house Mr Tinarwo on Saturday 26th June, 2004 and told him that he wanted to travel to Hwedza to do a spot check of some deliveries. The supervisor authorised him to take a Mazda B 1800 PWD 59 SC but said he should be accompanied by a driver. The Appellant suggested that he be accompanied by another officer, Mr Muchadakuenda, since drivers were not available. More
On 18 July 2023 I delivered the following ex tempore judgment in court. A written judgment has been requested and same is provided hereunder.
The facts of this matter are mostly common cause. The applicant is a returning resident who was entitled to a rebate on duty which was duly granted by the respondent. Among the applicant’s belongings which benefited from the rebate is a Landrover Range Rover TDV6 registration number AFE 5268 motor vehicle. It is also not in contention that applicant returned to the United Kingdom before 24 months expired and that he did not return to Zimbabwe... More
This is an appeal against an arbitration award made in favour of the respondent.
The appellant was employed by the respondent company stationed at Beitbridge border post. It was alleged that during the course of his duties respondent cleared on behalf of the respondent certain motor vehicles without payment of the requisite fees to the Respondent contrary to laid down procedures. He was charged and appeared before a disciplinary committee, which found him liable and subsequently dismissed. By letter dated June 13 2011 Appellant was advised of the outcome of the disciplinary hearing. In the same letter he was advised... More
