Appellant was convicted of one count of indecent assault as defined in s 67 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act, [Chapter 9:23] and another of rape as defined in s 65 of the same Act. He was sentenced to one year in respect of the indecent assault charge and seventeen years in respect of the rape charge. Of the 17 years imprisonment 4 years was suspended for five years on the usual conditions of future good behavior. The one year in respect of the indecent assault charge was ordered to run concurrently with the sentence in respect of... More
On 8 December 2010 at around 1700 hours and in Avonlea Drive, the plaintiff was approached by the defendant who was in company of other officers of the Criminal Investigation Department. The defendant ordered the plaintiff to disembark from the motor vehicle where he was sitting. He ordered the plaintiff to lie on the ground on his back.
The defendant accused the plaintiff of having stolen the motor vehicle he was in. The plaintiff protested his innocence. The defendant who was standing directly above the plaintiff, fired several shots aimed at the plaintiff’s legs. He proceeded to handcuff the complainantand... More
Applicant is the son of Tapson Ndlovu (Tapson) and Maria Ndlpovu (nee Tapera). Maria Ndlovu obtained a decree of divorce and ancillary relief against Tapson Ndlovu by order of this court in HC 788/17. This order was ganted on the 27th of July 2017 and per clause 4(1), the names of Trvor Ndlovu and Talent Ndlovu.
Meanwhile and unknown to applicant, 1st to 31st respondents who are members of a burial society obtained judgment against Tapson on the 11th of May 2017. This judgment was obtained on default of appearance of Tapson. The order directed Tapson to pay the sum... More
This is chamber application by the applicants seeking the dismissal of the court application under case No. HC 8289/16 filed by the respondent against the applicants. The chamber application is brought in terms of r 236 (4) (b) of the Rules of the High Court which reads;
“(4) Where the applicant has filed an answering affidavit in response to the respondent’s opposing affidavit but has not, within a month thereafter, set the matter down for hearing, the respondent, on notice to the applicant, may either—
(a) set the matter down for hearing in terms of r 223; or
(b) make... More
The applicants filed an Urgent Chamber Application on 26th September, 2019. The first to seventh respondents filed opposing papers on the date of the hearing The 8th to 14th respondents did not file any papers and their position is that they do not oppose the application, if the terms thereof are broadened to encapsulate their interests. Mr K. Shamuyariraa trade unionist representing the 15th respondent is opposed to the application. He also did not file opposing papers. More
The parties in this application are embroiled in a bitter dispute over the implications of their failure to specifically include Value added tax (abbreviated herein as “VAT”) matters in agreements for the milling of sugarcane. More
The applicants’ legal practitioners wrote a follow up letter dated 5 December 2016 enquiring on the judgment in this application which was argued before me on 8 November 2016. More
The facts in this matter are common cause. The appellant instituted proceedings in the magistrate court sitting at Chiredzi for the eviction of the respondents and all those claiming occupation through them from leased premises situated at Lot 11 A and Lot 12 A of Triangle Ranch Triangle Township, Triangle.
The first respondent is a company duly registered in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe. It is presently under Judicial Management. The 2nd to 32nd respondents are either farmer or current employees of the 1st respondent who occupy separate dwellings situated on the leased premises described above and are in... More
This is an application for leave to appeal a judgment of this Court, judgment number LC/H/746/13, to the Supreme Court. The Court in that judgment remitted the matter back to the applicant and ordered the applicant in the present application to record mitigation before approaching this Court. The order was made because the appeal was not properly before the Court. An adjudicating authority is enjoined by section 12 A (4) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] to consider mitigation before pronouncing a penalty especially where dismissal is a possibility. In that regard therefore it would have been inappropriate for the... More
This is an appeal against a determination of the National Employment Council (NEC) for the Tobacco Industry Grievance and Disciplinary Committee.
The second and fourth respondents were employed on seasonal contracts whilst the first and third respondents were employed on permanent contracts, by the appellant. More
This is an application for the review of a determination handed down by the National Employment Council Tobacco Industry Grievance and Disciplinary Committee (GDC) on 29 October 2015. The determination ordered the reinstatement of the respondents to their employment with the applicant, or payment of damages in lieu of reinstatement. More
The dispute revolves around an agreement of sale of an immovable property which was signed by the parties sometime in 2017. First respondent is a former employee of the applicant. Second respondent is the wife of the first respondent. First respondent was retrenched around 2017. Prior to the retrenchment, the applicant had advanced a loan to the first respondent. At the time of his retrenchment, the first respondent owed the applicant about US$492,000.00. The respondents signed an agreement for the sale of their property to the applicant in satisfaction of the outstanding loan amount. The parties also signed a loan... More
This is an old matter in which summons was issued in September 2018. The pre-trial conference was finalized in April 2021. The matter was set down for trial on 23 November 2021. The matter was on that date postponed to 15 February 2022 by consent. On 15 February 2012 the plaintiff’s co-counsel Ms Mabwe applied for a postponement on the basis that the plaintiffs needed to deal with a notice to amend plea which was raised by counsels for and on behalf of the 1st and 2nd defendants. The proposed amendment raised two issuesof law, firstly that the plaintiff has... More
This is an opposed application in which the applicant seeks the rescission of a judgment granted in default in case number HC 4922/11, together with costs of suit. At the hearing of the matter, I dismissed the application with costs and indicated that my reasons for so doing would follow. These are the reasons: More
