Respondent faced allegations of misconduct and a hearing was given. Meanwhile, Respondent attended at a Doctor’s rooms and the Doctor instructed that she take a rest. This was communicated to the Respondent through the Matron who was a senior supervisor at Respondent’s work-station. Meanwhile, Respondent’s representatives approached the Respondent with a view to having the matter postponed to a further date for a hearing. This was not entertained by the Hearing Officer who ruled that the matter was to proceed. The matter was heard in Respondent’s absence. Respondent made an application for review to this Court. Both parties filed submissions... More
Arbitrator J Madziya, issued an arbitration award at Harare date-stamped
25 November 2015. He ordered appellant to reinstate respondent or pay her damages in lieu of reinstatement. Appellant then appealed to this court against the award. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
The applicants approached the court in chambers by way of urgent chamber application. Basing on the documents filed of record in particular the certificate of urgency the court set the matter down so as to be addressed. On the date of hearing the 29/3/12 the court was served with opposing documents by the respondent at almost time of hearing, for expedience the court requested both counsel for the applicant Mr Sakutukwa and Mr Chivore for the respondent to address the court on urgency and merits. It was clearly spelt out to the parties in the event that the Court made... More
Before the court is a mining dispute. The parties herein elected to progress their trial cause as a special case in terms of r 52 of the High Court Rules 2021.The agreed statement of facts recorded the following events; -
[ 2] The defendant sold to plaintiff, by agreement dated 11 October 2021, its rights and interest in a set of mining blocks for a total consideration of US$ 2,050,000. The blocks were registered under number 41356BM, 41357B, 41358BM and 41359M and located at a place described as Berryl-Rose in the Mfurudzi Safari Area of Shamva District. I shall refer... More
This is an application for rescission of a default judgment in terms of Rule 29(1)(a) of the High Court Rules, 2021 (the Rules). The application is opposed.
Rule 29(1)(a) of the Rules provides as follows;
“29(1) The court or a judge may, in addition to any other powers it or he or she may have, on its own initiative or upon the application of any affected party, correct, rescind or vary-
(a) an order or judgement erroneously sought or erroneously granted in the absence of any party affected thereby; or…” More
This is an application for leave to appeal a judgment of this court to the Supreme Court.
Appeals from this court to the Supreme Court are provided for in section 92 F (1) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] (The Act) which reads:
“(1) An appeal on a question of law only shall lie to the Supreme Court from any decision of the Labour Court.”
It is therefore trite that only questions or a question of law should be raised as grounds of appeal. More
This is a court application in which the relief sought is the following declaratory order:
1.That the decision of the first respondent declaring forfeited to the State property belonging to the applicant, the property in question being four motor vehicles and their trailers, namely TRUCK HLH056FS (TRAILER TVH294GP); TRUCK HLH051FS (TRAILER FZ25WGGP); TRUCK HLH049FS (TRAILER VDW723GP) and TRUCK HJZ 717FS (TRAILER JF58CWGP), be and is hereby declared null and void and of no force or effect. AS CONSEQUENTIAL RELIEF, IT IS ORDERED:
2.That the decision of the first respondent declaring forfeited to the State property belonging to the applicant, the... More
TheApplicantshave approached this court on an urgent basis in terms of Rule 59(6) of the High Court Rules, 2021 seeking the relief of a declaratory order in terms of Section 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter7:06]. In particular, the applicants pray for the following relief:
“1. The Application for a declaratur be and is hereby granted.
2. That the amendment of Section 5.1 of the firstrespondents does not require that representatives of the Council appointed in December 2020 to be removed from their appointments before the end of their term of office.
3. The appointments by first to eighthrespondent... More
1. That it be and is hereby declared that the Conditions Precedent set forth in Part 9 of the Scheme of Arrangement have not been complied with.
2. That it be and is hereby declared that Applicant’s bid cannot be terminated on the basis that was accepted by the members and creditors of the Target Companies upon completion of the relevant tender process and that there is no legal justification for any payment obligations to be triggered by the Applicant before the Conditions Precedent of the Scheme of Arrangement are satisfied.
3. That it be and is hereby declared that... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Magistrates Court sitting at Masvingo confirming the cancellation of a Lease Agreement between the parties, ejecting the appellant from the leased premises, ordering the payment of holding over damages and costs of suit. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Labour Court dismissing an appeal against the determination of the second respondent, the Registrar of Labour, to register the first respondent as a trade union. The appellant is an organisation of bankers, while the first respondent was formed to represent the interests of managerial employees in the banking, finance and allied industry. More
On 5 July 2012 the Honourable P Shawatu made an arbitration award. The operative part ruled that,
“1. The parties i.e. Zibawu and Beaz, are hereby ordered that clause 6 of the July
2010 to December 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement meant that the year
on year inflation figure for every Collective Bargaining Cycle was to be used as the starting point in negotiating salary increases in each and every Collective Bargaining Cycle.
2. The parties are further ordered that the appropriate percentage is 10% which should be used to adjust the salaries for the period 1 January 2012 to 31... More
This is a court application in which the Applicants are seeking an order that the following matters: HC 2480/20, HC 2942/20, HC 3004/21, HC 2896/21 and HC 2875/20 be consolidated. That application besides exciting a counter-application has since been concluded by consent and resulted in the consolidation of matters HC 2480/20 and HC 2942/20, as the other matters have fallen by the way-side for one reason or another. Zhiqiang Gao and GUIBIAO ZHANG have sought the consolidation of HC 2480/20, HC 2942/20 and HC 4303/21 in a counter application and that counter application is opposed. More
The first plaintiff is the Baptist Convention of Zimbabwe, a duly constituted common law universitas of religious discourse capable of suing and being sued in its name. The second plaintiff is Ngezi Baptist Church, an affiliate member of the first plaintiff, and also a voluntary religious association capable of suing and being sued in its own name. All the defendants are the members of the Ngezi Baptist Church (second plaintiff) who sought to be dissociated with the governing body which is the Baptist Convention of Zimbabwe (first plaintiff) after the first plaintiff made certain amendments to its Constitution. More
The English phrase which reads ‘Let sleeping dogs lie’ carries a lot of meaning with it. Whoever coined the phrase as such must have done his homework. He must have applied his mind to the same. He must, in my view, have realised that, when a person calls at another’s home and finds the dogs at the residence in a sleeping mode, the risk of him being bitten by them is less where he allows them to continue to enjoy their sleep than when he does anything which disturbs their sleep. He must have realised that the moment that he... More
