This is an application for stay of execution of orders of the Magistrates Court in case No. 255/12 dated 9 and 23 February 2012.
The background to the application is that on 5 January 2012, the applicant filed an application seeking the ejectment of the respondents from No. 144 Nelson Mandela Avenue, Harare (the premises). The applicant alleged in the application that it is in occupation of No 142/4 Nelson Mandela Avenue, Harare pursuant to a lease agreement with a company called Zeolite Investments (Pvt) Ltd dated 22 March 2011. Prior to the conclusion of the lease agreement, the premises... More
At the hearing of this matter I denied respondent the indulgence to file a notice of response belatedly. The matter proceeded in terms of Rule 22 (b) (i). The appeal was granted and the arbitral award was set aside. The following are the reasons for that decision. More
n an action which it filed with the court on 18 February 2016, the applicant sued the respondent. It claimed from the respondent:
(a) payment of $14 7698.14 which it said was for:
(i) catering services it rendered to the respondent for the period 2012 to 2015 – and
(ii) collection Commission at the rate of 10% of the principal debt;
(b) interest at the prescribed rate per annum – and
(c) costs of suit. More
This matter was filed under a certificate of urgency with this court on the 25th July 2022. The parties appeared before me on the 3rd of August 2022 to argue the matter. The applicant seeks an order in the following terms:
“Interim relief sought
1. It is hereby ordered that the applicant be allowed occupation, use and access to a mine registered under certificate of registration number 30223 registered on 5 October 2015, in the name of Silobela Community Development Trust in respect of a mine named Turtle 54.
2. The 4threspondent with all those who act through him on... More
The parties were married to each other in terms of the Marriage Act Chapter 5:11 in Harare on 23 August 2008 and the marriage still subsists. There are two minor children of the marriage both boys, one of whom is 8 years old and the other is 6 years. The marriage has irretrievably broken down and the plaintiff has filed for divorce, custody of the minor children of the marriage Owethu Reabetsoe Dlodlo born on 4 November 2010 and Kabongwe Otsile Dlodlo born on 12 January 2012. Plaintiff terndered reasonable access to the defendant. She also claimed maintenance of R20... More
MAKONESE J: This is an application for a summary judgment against the respondent. The applicant seeks the relief of rei vindicatio in the following terms;
“Respondent and all those claiming through her be and are hereby ordered to forthwith vacate House Number 54a Leander Ave, Hillside, Bulawayo also known as the Remaining Extent of Subdivision 2 of Lot 63A Hillside situate in the district of Bulawayo.” More
Its narrative is that it has legal mining rights over the registered area in Shamva which is within Lot 1 of New Brixton Farm with a total size of 68 hectares in extent. It states that what the respondents did some four days which precede 5 November, 2022 compelled it to file this application on an urgent basis. The respondent, it claims, invaded its mining claims, raided its gold ore from its mining locations and took the same to a mill for its own benefit. It alleges that, on 1 November 2022, the respondents returned to the mine with a... More
The plaintiff issued summons in which the following relief is being claimed:
a) Payment of US$225 000 together with interest at the prescribed rate.
b) An order that the second defendant shall not transfer stand number 7488 Salisbury Township held under deed of transfer number 697/02 to the first defendant until payment of US$225 000 has been made to the plaintiff by the first defendant.
c) That the first defendant shall pay costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale More
Respondent was employed by Appellant. Respondent’s contract was allegedly unprocedurally terminated and the matter was referred to arbitration. The arbitrator found in Respondent’s favour by ordering reinstatement. Appellant was however uncomfortable with reinstating Respondent and requested the arbitrator to proceed with quantification of damages in lieu of reinstatement. The arbitrator proceeded to do this and Appellant is dissatisfied and has approached this Court on appeal. More
Appellant worked for Respondent as a teacher. He was charged with various acts of misconduct. The main offence was improper association with a female pupil at his school. A hearing was conducted. He was found guilty and then dismissed from employment. He has appealed to this Court against the dismissal. More
The Applicant in casu who had been represented throughout but was now appearing as a self actor explained the extent of delay and the reasons thereof. He submitted that the extent of delay being 3 months was a short period of delay. He had to wait for 3 months from the date of receipt of the quantification award due to discussions that were ongoing between the parties. He was also short of funds and could not secure the services of a legal practitioner. Upon retaining the services of counsel he had then filed the present application for condonation of late... More
This is an application for condonation for late filing an application for review. It is opposed. At the commencement of the proceedings the Court drew the applicant’s attention to the terms of the draft order. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Negotiating Committee Appeals Board which confirmed the Appellant’s dismissal following allegations of unsatisfactory performance of his duties at the Respondent company where he was employed at the time of the alleged misconduct.
Facts of the case are that on 13th October 2011 Appellant was carrying out his security guard duties at Tiger Transport where Respondent Company had been contracted to provide security services. During that period 2 heavy duty batteries were stolen from one of the trucks parked at the place where the Appellant was guarding. More
These are two cases under one judgment. At a pre-hearing case management conference, the parties agreed to have them consolidated. It made sense. Among other things, the cause of action in both matters is the same. The real protagonists are the same. Kindred orders are being sought. Both matters were filed under certificates of urgency. They were filed on the same day. More
