Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse all Court Judgements
This appeal was heard on 31 March 2017. At the conclusion of submissions by counsel this Court issued the following order: “Having considered submissions by counsel, we are of the unanimous view that this is a proper case for remittal to the court a quo. Accordingly we order as follows: 1. The appeal is allowed with costs. 2. The judgment of the court a quo is set aside. 3. The matter is remitted to the High Court for a determination of the merits by a different judge. 4. The reasons for this order will be made available on request by... More

The applicant seeks a final interdict barring the five respondents from interfering with its mining operations on pieces of land situate in on communal lands in the Zaka District of Masvingo Province. Through the affidavit deposed to by its director, Boysen Mutembwa, it alleges that the five respondents are conducting illegal mining activities on some of its registered mining blocks, a claim which the respondents deny. It further avers that it is the registered holder of mining claims known as Bvuma Mining project which it obtained sometime in 2017 and 2018. It has since affected developments thereon pursuant to its... More

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

This matter was heard on 5 November 2024. I issued an order in terms of which I upheld the respondent’s point in limine that the applicant’s claim had prescribed and consequently, dismissed this application with costs. I gave brief reasons for my decision then. On 7 November 2024, the applicant’s legal practitioners requested the written reasons thereof. These are they. 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