On 25th January 2012, Applicant filed an application for review by this Court. Her founding affidavit, as amplied by her submissions show, the following facts:
1.
She worked for Respondent as a Handling Supervisor based at Norton.
2.
On 26TH January 2010 she was suspended without pay.
3.
On 27th January 2010 she was charged with misconduct.
4.
On 4th and 11th February 2010 a disciplinary hearing was held.
5.
On 22nd February 2010 she was informed of the outcome of the hearing through a letter of dismissal.
6.
On 1st March 2010 she appealed against her dismissal. More
On 29 March 2008, the harmonised presidential, parliamentary and council elections were held in Zimbabwe. The petitioner stood as the candidate on behalf of Zimbabwe African National Union (Patriotic Front) ‘ZANU PF’ for the House of Assembly seat in the constituency of Mbare. The first respondent contested the seat on behalf of the Movement for Democratic Change ‘MDC’. The second respondent was responsible to conduct and supervise the polls. On 30 March, 2008 the first respondent was declared the winner of the seat. More
The applicants appeared in this court praying that this court should grant the order in the Draft Order which states as follows:
“It is ordered that
(1) The respondent shall pay to the first, second, third and fourth applicants by way of salaries and benefits with effect from 9 April and 24 May 2012 respectively, broken down as follows:
TendayiTamanikwa, the sum of US$77 504-93
Frank Tinarwo the sum of US$77 984-93
EmmersonPamire, the sum of US$76 344-93
TendaiMombeshora, the sum of US$69 223-04
(2) The respondent shall pay the costs of this application.” More
This is an application for the placement of the first respondent under Provisional Judicial Management in terms of section 207 as read with section 206 (g) of the Companies Act (Chapter 24:03). More
This application is for an extension of time within which to file a notice of opposition in case number HC 2301/19. The order sought is couched in the following terms:
1. The applicant’s late filing of the notice of opposition be and is hereby condoned.
2. The applicant is hereby required to file and serve its notice of opposition on the 2nd respondent’s court application for review within 48 hours of this order.
3. No order as to costs.
The application is opposed.
During hearing, Mr Sibanda, counsel for the applicant after trying to argue in support of this application,... More
In this matter the applicant filed an urgent chamber application asking for the placement of the 1st respondent in provisional liquidation in terms of section 207 as read with section 206 of the Companies Act Chapter 24:03.
Section 206 provides for circumstances under which a company may be wound up by a court and section 207 provides for how the petition for winding up is presented. Section 206 (g) provides that a company may be wound up by the court if the court is of the opinion that it is just and equitable that the company should be wound up.... More
This application was initially set down for hearing on the 8th of February 2022. The applicant, then a self-actor, made an application for a postponement on the basis that he had engaged a legal practitioner but had not yet finalised with him. Although the application was opposed, the court granted the application and indicated to him that the matter would proceed on the 11th of February 2022. On that date, the applicant’s legal practitioner appeared and indicated that the Advocate whom they had engaged had advised him that morning that she was unavailable due to ill-health. The court indicated that... More
The applicant is the former registered owner of an immovable property known as a certain piece of land situate in the District of Salisbury called Stand 425 Marlborough Township Extension 2 of Marlborough measuring 6 808 square metres which he held under Deed of Transfer Number 10289/2002 (the property). The property was sold in execution of a judgment debt of US$39, 000.00 and costs of suit granted in favour of the third respondent herein against the applicant and Micromart (Private) Limited (Micromart) on 15 February 2016, under HC 9923/14. The second respondent purchased the property from a Sheriff’s sale. Its... More
This is a court application for a Declaratory Order and Consequential relief made in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7.06] in which the applicants seek an order couched in the following terms:
That the decision of the second respondent to sell late David Govere’s private property namely Number 52 Hessel Road, Borrowdale, Harare, through a skewed private treaty to an interested party be declared unlawful.
That the Surety Agreement relied upon to regard the late David Govere as a co-principal debtor to COLDRAC Products (Pvt) Limited and the attachment of his personal private property be... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award.
Appellants’ ground of appeal was that the Arbitrator erred in concluding that the termination of the contract was lawful because the contracts were fixed term contracts that had expired.
The Arbitrator’s term of reference was to determine if the dismissal was unfair. More
Applicant seeks condonation for the late filing of an application for rescission of judgment entered against him in default by this court on 22 September 2017.
He seeks that order on the following averments. He had left Zimbabwe for the United States of America (“USA”) in 1999and had acquired American citizenship. He has not resided in Zimbabwe since then. When summons were issued on 30 June 2017 he was in Afghanistan. He went back to the USA on 17 October 2017. The summons was served at Carrington Avenue, Paradise Park, Marondera where his estranged wife resides. His wife, Georgina Masike,... More
This is an opposed application wherein the applicant seeks the following relief:
“1. 1st, 2nd , 3rd, 4th and 5thRespondents and all persons claiming occupation through
them on Subdivision B of Sandibloom in Headlands Makoni District in
Manicaland Province be and are hereby interdicted from interfering whatsoever
with applicant’s rights of occupation on the farm. More
The plaintiff and the defendant are husband and wife respectively and they married each other in Harare on 7 March 1990 in terms of the Marriage Act [Cap 5:11]. Prior to that the parties had married traditionally on 21 January 1990 and the same marriage was blessed in church on 28 July 1990. The parties have been married for 22 years. More
The appellants are being charged with fraud as defined in s136 or alternatively, forgery as defined in s137(1)(a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. Their application for bail pending trial was refused by the magistrates court sitting at Chitungwiza on the basis that
1. The circumstances of the case are such that if convicted, no court can consider a non-custodial sentence in circumstances where, this, coupled with the gravity of the offense is likely to induce applicants not to stand trial.
2. The case against them is strong given that the computer seized from first appellants... More
