The above appeals are all centred on the decision of the respondent refusing to allow as permissible deductions in terms of section 15(2)(gg) of the Income Tax Act [Cap 23:06] certain expenditures incurred by the appellants. To the extent that there are minimal disputes of fact and to the extent that the issues of law raised are the same, it was agreed to consolidate the matters and to issue a single judgment covering all the appellants. More
The brief facts are that the Appellant was employed as an agent or dealer of the Respondent. On 25 October 2010 Appellant was suspended from employment using SI 15/06. He was suspended on allegations of contravening sections 4 (a), (b), (d) and (f) of SI 15 of 2006. He appeared before a hearing which found him guilty and dismissed him from employment. Appellant referred the matter for conciliation. There was no settlement resulting in the matter being referred for arbitration. The Arbitrator confirmed Appellant’s dismissal from employment. More
On 3 February 2021, the applicants filed an urgent chamber application seeking to interdict the enforcement of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) (Standard Scale of Fines) Notice 2021 (“SI 25/21”), which was published in an extraordinary Government Gazette on 25 January 2021. Perhaps, it is important to begin by giving the context in which this application was filed and came before me. It is common cause that, on 28 March 2020, the Public Health (Covid-19 Prevention, Containment and Treatment and Treatment) Regulations 2020, Statutory Instrument 77 of 2020 (“SI 77/20”) came in force. This piece of legislation contained provisions... More
Litigants in this country are fast developing this unacceptable and indeed detestful habit of trifling with courts of law and in the process succeeding in bringing the courts to disrepute. There is no other way of describing the opposition to this application for registration of an arbitral award made against the respondent by D Mudzengi, an arbitrator, on 7 June 2011 than to say that it is trifling with the court in a regrettable manner.
The applicant was employed by the respondent, and from the papers before, me she is still so employed, as a project co-ordinator/manager. The respondent is... More
This is an urgent chamber application lodged in this court on 10 December 2021. It was placed before KABASA J who on 13 December 2021 directed that the applicant serve the urgent chamber application on the respondents together with the Notice of Set Down for Tuesday 16 December 2021 at 12 noon. On 16 December 2021 the matter although ready to be argued, could not be argued as the Legal Practitioner for the 1st respondent was indisposed and by consent of the parties the matter was post-poned to Monday 20 December 2021. With KABASA J’s duty ending on 17 December... More
The appellant appealed to the Appeals Committee, in terms of the appellant company’s Code of Conduct (the Code). The appeal, which was lodged on 10 January 2011, was out of time, in terms of the timelines stipulated by the Code. On 15 March 2011, the Appeals Committee refused to hear appellant’s appeal, as it was out of time. More
Plaintiff issued summons claiming against the defendant a decree of divorce and ancillary relief.
The parties were married on the 21st of December 1990 in terms of the Marriage Act (Chapter 5:11) and the same still subsists. During the subsistence of their marriage, the parties were blessed with three children who have all since attained the age of majority. The parties have agreed to the distribution of their movable property leaving the sole issue for determination by this court as whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to 50% share of the matrimonial property being 7833 Lotus Drive, Highmount, Bulawayo. More
Plaintiff issued summons against the defendantsclaiming payment of €9 270 as fees due under a consulting contract, interest thereon at the prescribed rate, collection commission and costs on the legal practitioner and client scale. More
This is an application for rescission of default judgment brought in terms of Order 9 rule 63 of the High Court Rules 1971. The relief sought is that:
1. Judgment in case HC 1805/12 entered against applicant on 28 March 2012 be and is hereby rescinded.
2. Applicant is granted leave to supply further particulars requested by first and second respondents under case HC 11517/11 within five (5) days of the date of the granting of this order.
3. First and second respondents pay costs of suit on a legal practitioner client scale if opposed to the application. More
The material facts of this matter are to a large extent common cause. The parties however led evidence and I shall summarize this in due course.
It is common cause that the parties concluded a written agreement of lease in respect of Willowvale Service Station in Harare on 8 March 2006. Prior to that, the parties had concluded a similar agreement or similar agreements in respects of the same premises as the legal relationship between the parties commenced in or about 2000. More
The applicant, a retired accountant approached the court seeking the following relief against the respondents.
“IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. 1st Respondent, shall pay to the Applicant the sum of USD$72 232.87 plus interest at the same calculated at the rate of 5% per annum with effect from the 1st of November 2018, and alternatively
2. That the 1st Respondent shall pay the Applicant the sum of USD$72 232.87 or its equivalency in local currency calculated at the local exchange rate as defined by the Dutch auction system plus interest at the legal rate on the above amount calculated from... More
The appellant appeared before a Magistrates’ Court sitting at Bindura charged with the offence of contravening section 66 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] – aggravated indecent assault (5 counts). More
This is an application for change of name made in terms of s24 (2) of the Companies Act [Chapter 24.03] as well as under the common law. The purpose of this application is basically to seek an order-
(a) Directing the first to the forth respondents to change their registered names from their present names (Sheltersol Holdings (Pvt) Ltd, Sheltersol Finance (Pvt) Ltd, Sheltersol Property Development (Pvt) Ltd and Sheltersol Manufacturing (Pvt) Ltd respectively to such other names as do not contain the word “Shelter” in them.
(b) Failing compliance with paragraph (a) above, that the fifth respondent be directed... More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of an appeal. The application arises out of a determination handed down by the respondent’s Disciplinary Authority on 6 August 2019 More
The plaintiff issued summons against the defendants for the following relief:
1. That the plaintiff be and is hereby declared the rightful owner of Stand number 454 Unit Seke, Chitungwiza.
2. That the transfer of Stand 454 Unit C Seke, Chitungwiza into Gideon Musendo’s name be and is hereby nullified.
3. That the 2nd defendant cede rights, title and interest in the property aforementioned back to the plaintiff within seven (7) days of this order failure of which the Sheriff be and is hereby empowered to signal documents necessary to effect cession to the Plaintiff
4. That the 1st defendant... More
