The notice of appeal was served on respondent on 28 April 2023. Per Rule 19(2) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017 a Response was required within 10 (ten) days that is on or by 14 May 2023. The respondent filed its response on 24 May 2023.
Appellant argued that the Response is improperly before Court as it was filed out of time and without seeking condonation by this Court. Respondent replied that the notice of appeal was served without attachments. They only managed to get all the documents from this Court on 3 May 2023. Then they sought assistance to... More
On 17 March 2023 at Harare, Designated Agent, P. Chiyangwa, made a determination. She ordered respondent to pay appellant an amount of ZWL$34,912,50 in respect of outstanding leave pay. Appellant then appealed the determination to this Court in terms of Section 92 D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 hereafter called the Act.
Respondent opposed the appeal. More
This was an opposed application. The original and main dispute was between the applicant and the third respondent. But in this particular application the applicant sought a remedy against the first and second respondents. I guess the third respondent was cited merely as a nominal respondent being so much of an interested party. More
The appellant avers that on a date prior to 1 January 2018 it entered into an agreement with the respondent in terms of which the appellant agreed to sell tea products valued at USD 47 493.17 to the respondent for resale in Malawi. The appellant proceeded to deliver the tea products to the respondent in Malawi at 1220 Kenneth Kaunda Avenue, Blantyre, Malawi. For purposes of ensuring that such export delivery could be done, the appellant declared such exportation through CDI forms obtained from the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe. The appellant was required by law to repatriate the export earnings... More
The applicant, a public company which is duly registered as such in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe, applies for a declaratur. It premises its application on a judgment which was granted to it on 5 December, 2018 under HC 10306/18. The judgment ordered the respondent who is a natural person, to pay to it the sum of $47 593.17 together with interest theron of 5% per annum reckoned form 7 September 2018 to the date of full payment. More
The applicant, a South African registered transport company, seeks the release of one of its haulage trucks seized by officials of the respondent. The said truck, consisting of a mechanical horse and two trailers (“the truck”), was impounded in Masvingo en route from South Africa. The seizure took place after a routine roadblock search conducted on it yielded a contraband of smuggled goods comprising 31 refrigerators, 10 electric stoves and a few other items (“the smuggled goods”) over and above the consignment of goods that had been officially declared at the port of entry. The latter goods were referred to... More
On 31 March 2020 applicant applied for a protection order in terms of the Domestic Violence Act [Chapter 5:16] against first respondent. An interim order was issued by second respondent and on 11 June 2020 second respondent after hearing submissions from the parties, granted a reciprocal protection order which order was meant to protect the parties against each other.
Aggrieved by the second respondent’s ruling granting such an order, applicant approached this court on review on the following grounds:-
1. that second respondent’s decision was grossly irregular
2. that second respondent was also grossly unreasonable and irrational
3. that second... More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal was made in terms of Section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. Respondent opposed the appeal. The grounds of appeal challenge the propriety of the both conviction and penalty. More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. On the date of hearing of the appeal Respondent defaulted. However its case is set out in their Response filed of record. Ordinarily I would have granted the appeal by reason of Respondent’s default. However the record shows that the appeal is devoid of merit.Why?
Appellant worked for Respondent as a Bus Inspector. He was charged with misconduct. A hearing was held. The minutes thereof are filed of record. More
This is an urgent chamber application wherein the applicants pray for a provisional order in the following terms:
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT:
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. The terms and conditions which applied to the Applicants at the time of their admission be and are hereby declared to be binding on the Respondent.
2. The regulatory framework imposed on the Applicants on 22 August 2012 be and is hereby declared a nullity.
3. The resolution of the meeting of 7 August 2012 be... More
In this appeal the appellants were aggrieved by the determination of an arbitrator. The Labour Act Chapter 28:01 stipulates that only issues of law may be brought on appeal against a determination of an arbitrator. In this matter the arbitrator made a factual finding that the appellants were fairly dismissed after committing the alleged offences. The grounds of appeal raise issues of a factual nature. These grounds are therefore not properly before the Court. Further, there is no averrement that the Learned Arbitrator misdirected himself on the facts and that such misdirection amounted to a misdirection at law. In the... More
The first and second applicants are the adoptive parents of “A”, a minor child they adopted as a couple. After applicants adopted the minor children, they went on to obtain adoption orders from the Children’s Court at which point they took a further step to acquire birth certificates for them in terms of the Births and Deaths Registration Act. Central to the applicants’ case is the endorsement of the words, “unknown” on their children’s birth certificates. The applicants averred that they were shocked to discover that they had been issued with birth certificates which only had information about the children... More
This is an appeal against part of the decision of the respondents disciplinary authority which found appellant teacher guilty of act of misconduct of being absent from duty without excuse and for refusing to invigilate public examinations that were taking place at his school. Appellant was penalised by a fine of ZWL $45 000, transfer from Highfield School to Simbaredenga School and a reprimand. Appellant is unhappy with the guilty verdict emanating from his alleged refusal to invigilate Public examinations. He is also of the view that the penalties meted on him were harsh. More
This is an application for condonation for the late filing of an appeal and for an extension of time within which to note an appeal. The application is made in terms of r 43 (1) and (3) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018. More
This application was dismissed on the date of hearing. A request has been made for reasons for the dismissal. These are they.
Applicant is facing a single count of contravening section 65 (1) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act [Chapter 9:23]. The allegations are that in March 2019 the applicant raped his 16 year old biological daughter. The complainant reported the matter to her uncle who took her to the police and filed a report. More
