Appellant was employed by the respondent as a driver/salesman. Following allegations of misconduct, appellant was brought before the Disciplinary Committee which found him guilty. A subsequent appeal to the Works Council confirmed the decision of the Disciplinary Committee. More
On 1 July 2015 the respondent sued the applicants for a sum of USD 60 000.00 being damages for malicious prosecution. He alleged that the applicants wrongfully and maliciously caused his arrest, detention and prosecution for contempt of court as a result of which he suffered damages in the sum of USD60 000.00. More
This application involves a long-standing dispute over the control of Glencairn Mine, Kadoma (the Mine). The 4th applicant and the 1st and 2nd respondents are shareholders in the 3rd applicant which owns the Mine at the centre of the dispute. More
The applicants seek an order declaring the respondent liable for contempt of court. It is proposed that the respondent be committed to prison for a period of thirty days wholly suspended on condition that the respondent and all those claiming through her shall within twenty four hours of this order vacate stand 1089 Tynwald, Harare. More
On the 30th of January 2022, the applicant was driving his employer’s vehicle registration No. ADS 1099 along Bulawayo – Victoria Falls Road. At the 335 km peg he was involved in a road traffic accident in which the motor vehicle driven by the applicant collided with another motor vehicle as a result of which that other vehicle suffered certain damages. Following the accident, applicant was charged with contravening section 52 (2) of the Road Traffic Act Chapter 13:11 “Negligent Driving.” He appeared before the 1st respondent, pleaded guilty and was convicted in terms of section 271 (2) (b) as... More
On 22 May 2022, I dismissed the applicant`s prayer for condonation of late noting of appeal. Applicant addressed a letter on 9 August 2023 requesting written reasons thereof. The letter went thus; -
“Kindly take note that, I filed an application for condonation of late noting of appeal with the High Court on 11th November 2021 under case number CON 279/21. The application was dismissed in chambers before honourable Mr. Justice Chilimbe on the 22nd of May 2022. More
This is an appeal from a decision of the Chief Executive Officer of Respondent dismissing Appellant from employment. Appellant was dismissed after having been found guilty of gross incompetence and neglect of duty in violation of item 3 section C to Annexure 11 of Respondent’s Code of Conduct More
The plaintiff instituted the instant action claiming a sum of US$100 000.00 in respect of defamation damages. The claim arises from the publication by the defendant, a publisher of newspapers, of an article under its letters to the editor section, of an article entitled, “Police, Army please Act”. More
The appellant was employed by the respondent as a supervisor. The parties mutually terminated the employment contract on 4 November 2014.
The agreement was reduced into writing and appellant was paid his terminal benefits in terms of the deed of settlement.
In August 2015 the appellant referred a complaint to a labour officer against respondent for non-payment of overtime.
When conciliation efforts failed the matter was referred to an arbitrator. The arbitrator dismissed the claim predominantly on the basis that appellant failed to prove his claim. More
The circumstances leading to this appeal maybe summarised as follows:
On the 19th September 2014 the Appellant entered into a lease agreement with Letwin Emmanuel in respect of property known as 4 Kinross, Alexandra Park, Harare.The property was managed by Luxury Real Estate Agents and the rentals were supposed to be paid to the said Letwin Emmanuel, through the estate agent’s account or directly to Letwin Emmanuel. Letwin Emmanuel was the legal owner of the property and had title deeds. In terms of the written lease agreement between the parties rent was set at US1 000 00 per month. More
The applicants in this matter seek an order in the following terms:
1. That first respondent be and is hereby barred from disposing of and effecting transfer of house No 16036, 6th Street, Sunningdale 2, Harare.
2. That fourth respondent be and is hereby ordered not to effect any transfer of House No 16036, 6th Street, Sunningdale 2, Harare.
3. That House No 16036, 6th Street Sunningdale 2 Harare be and is hereby registered in the names of Sydney Mutara, Christine Mutara and Solomon Mutara in equal shares or;
4. Alternatively: That house no 6118 St Marys’ Chitungwiza and Stand... More
This matter was set down as an application for confirmation of a ruling by a labour officer in terms of Section 93 (5) Labour Amendment Act. On the hearing date the employer raised a point in limine to the effect that the matter was improperly before the court. This was so taking into account two recent decisions of Sakarombe v Montana Meats SC-4-10 and Isoquant Investment v Darku No CCZ 6/20. The employer’s argument was that the labour officer sat on the matter as if it were an appellate body contrary to the spirit of Montana Meats (supra). It also... More
This judgement only deals with points in limine raised by the respondent employer. The 2 points are, that there is no clear relief sought by the appellant thus making the appeal fatally defective and susceptible to being struck off the roll.The2nd point is that appellant has raised in grounds 1 and 8 review issues in an appeal. Ground 1 pertains toflouting of timelines by therespondent employer and ground 8 relates to issues around minutes of the disciplinary proceedings. In like manner it is respondent’s view that these 2 grounds have to be expurged from the record for being bad at... More
