This is an appeal against an arbitral award in favour of Respondent. Respondent was employed by the Appellant as a Class 4 Moulder as from 4 September 2006. Respondent alleges that in January 2009 a supervisor advised employees to stop reporting for duty. He further alleged that towards the Easter Holiday in 2009 the General Manager, Mr. N. Nyemba informed him to report for work. When he approached the Appellant he was advised that the situation had not changed. Again around early June 2009 Respondent alleges he was advised to report to work. On arrival he was advised that the... More
The facts in this matter are largely common cause. The respondents were employed by the appellant. The appellant, due to viability problems, informed the respondents that it was no longer in a position to continue operations of the Mutare Branch. The appellant informed the respondents not to attend to work until told to do so by the appellant. The respondents were informed that they could in the interim seek employment elsewhere. The respondents later took their matter with the Labour Office which office referred the matter to arbitration. The arbitrator found in favour of the respondents and the appellant has... More
This is an application for quantification of damages for loss of employment. The application is opposed.
The material background facts to the matter are as follows. The applicant was employed by the Respondent as an Auto Electrician. She was engaged from 2008 to the 12th of July 2012 when she was dismissed by Respondent following a disciplinary process. Aggrieved with the determination and penalty by Respondent, Applicant approached this court with an application for review conjoined with an appeal. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent appeals committee which upheld appellant’s dismissal following allegations of carrying out an act which is inconsistent with the express or implied conditions of the contract of employment in contravention of section D25 of the respondent code of conduct. More
Although this matter was filed on the back of a certificate of urgency, its hearing got delayed on account of the need for a clinical psychologist’s report. There was also a directive that the court be furnished with an additional report from a social worker but this never materialised. Other administrative interventions also militated against an early resumption of hearing. Ultimately, at the hearing of the matter the legal practitioners involved had not engaged in any research, a task that then fell on the Judge. More
On 18 September 2023 this court heard and determined an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the Magistrates’ Court given under case number CC2472/21. In the application before the Magistrates’ Court, the 1st respondent sought and was granted an eviction order against the appellant from a house in one of the high-density suburbs in Bulawayo on the basis that the appellant has been occupying the property in question without the 1st respondent’s consent. Yet, the 1st respondent is the holder of all rights and interests in respect of the property by an agreement of sale that she has... More
This is an application whereby the applicant seeks the following interim relief.
“Pending finalisation of this matter, the applicant be and is hereby granted the following relief:
The execution of the warrant issued by this court under cover of HC 1525/19 be and is hereby temporarily stayed pending the return date of this matter.”
The facts of this matter are that applicant is married to 1st respondent and the marriage still subsists. Sometime in 2011, applicant sought and got a provisional order barring 1st and 4th respondents from selling the parties’ matrimonial home namely stand C55 Njube Township in Bulawayo. More
This is a court application for specific performance, declaratur and other consequential reliefs. The reliefs sought are hereunder set out in full as follows:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT:-
1. The purported cancellation, by first respondent, of the agreement of sale of the immovable property described in paragraph 2 below concluded between First respondent and applicant be and is hereby declared to be invalid, null and void.
2. The first respondent be and are hereby directed to,within seven (7) days of the date of this order, sign all documents and do all things necessary to have the transfer of a certain... More
This matter was brought before me on a certificate of urgency on 25 June 2013. After considering the papers I declined to hear the matter on urgent basis on 26 June 2013. In so declining I remarked as follows: More
This is an application for absolution from the instance which was made by the defendant at the close of the plaintiff’s case. The plaintiff’s claim is for damages for defamation arising out of alleged communication which was made by the defendant to Stanbic Bank of and concerning the plaintiff. The background facts may be summarised as follows More
In this matter applicants filed an Urgent Chamber Application in terms of which they applied for a stay of execution of a default judgment pending determination of the applicants’ application for rescission of judgment. At the hearing of the application I ruled ex tempore that the matter was not urgent and removed it from the roll of Urgent Applications. The following are detailed reasons for the judgement:-According to applicants’ application the default judgment the subject of their application for rescission of judgment was granted by the High Court at the Pre-Trial Conference held on the 29 March 2022 under case... More
This was an application for summary judgment. The defence was bogus. I granted the application soon after argument and gave reasons ex tempore. The respondents say they want to appeal. They have asked for a written judgment. This is it. More
This is appeal against both conviction and sentence of a judgment of the Provincial Magistrate sitting at Karoi Magistrates Court. The appellant who initially appeared before the court jointly charged with two others who were subsequently acquitted was convicted after a trial for bribery in contravention of s170 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act 9 (Chapter 9:07). He was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment of which 5 months imprisonment was conditionally suspended for 5 years. More
This is an application for the upliftment of the automatic bar that came about after applicant failed to file a new set of opposing papers against the confirmation of a Provisional Order that had been granted against it after it had filed opposing papers for argument on whether or not a Provisional Order should be granted. It would appear applicant’s lawyer laboured under the mistake that once having filed opposing papers against the granting of the interim order, if it had no additional information it would still use the same opposing papers to argue against the confirmation of the Provisional... More
