The history of mental illness runs deep in Learnmore Michael (the accused)’s family. His mother lives with mental illness. He has a sister who lives with the same condition whilst another of his sisters committed suicide. She was driven into it by a mental health problem. As will be illustrated later in this judgment, there is evidence that the accused may have been mentally ill at the time he committed this murder. It may not be possible to apportion blame on him for his actions. More
Vevhu approached this court on an urgent basis in terms of rule 40 of the Commercial Court Rules SI 123-20. It sought a provisional order, pending arbitration, interdicting Operation Nehemiah from carrying out certain civil works on a tract of land known as Lot 12 of Spitzkop. This parcel of virgin land (“Lot 12”), lies due west of Harare in the rural district of Zvimba. More
On 21 November 2023, applicant unsuccessfully moved to have this matter heard on an urgent basis. On 23 November 2023, I handed down the reasons, under judgment number HH 628-23, for deferring the matter to the ordinary roll. The matter was, in due course, set down on the normal roll and argued on the merits on 18 January 2024. Herewith the judgment. More
This is an appeal against Honourable Mr Z. Mtimtema’s arbitral award, handed down on 15th April 2014. The award upheld the dismissal of the Appellant from employment after the Respondent’s Disciplinary Committee found him guilty of misconduct. More
The Applicant was employed by the Respondent as a driver until June 2016 when he was dismissed from employment. This was following a disciplinary process convened in terms of Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006. The Applicant was facing charges arising from allegations that he had pre-warned illegal fuel dealers of the impending spot-checks or inspections by the Respondent’s officials thus by doing he was frustrating his employer’s regulatory role. The Applicant was found guilty of the charges. His initial appeal to the Respondent’s Appeals Officer was dismissed for lack of merit on 18 July 2016. More
This is an urgent chamber application for an interdict. What can be gathered from the papers filed is the following. The applicant is the registered owner of mining claims held under claim numbers 47323, 47324, 47325, 47326 and 47327 which were issued by the Ministry of Mines and Mining Development in terms of the Mines and Minerals Act [Chapter 21:05] in May 2020. On 26 August 2020 the respondent was issued with a mining certificate under Shamva ‘X’ mine, registration number 47622 which mining claim falls on an area covered by the applicant’s mining claims. This resulted in a dispute... More
The applicant seeks recognition and registration of an arbitral award granted in its favour by an arbitrator. The parties entered into an agreement whereby the respondent would lease the applicant’s service station in Rusape for purposes of selling its fuel and petroleum products. The respondent operates several such service stations countrywide.
[2] A dispute arose between the parties as to when the lease agreement was set to expire. This was after the applicant wrote to respondent advising it of its intention to repossess the premises. Whether the respondent ought to have vacated the premises on the date that applicant argues... More
This is an application for summary judgment.
On 18 January 2010, the plaintiff issued summons out of this court seeking an order evicting the defendant from certain premises situate at number 19 guest Avenue, Alexander Park, Harare. The plaintiff also sought an order compelling the defendant to settle arrear rentals in the sum of US$ 9 500 and holding over damages at the rate of $500-00 per month from the date of summons to date of payment in full. It was the plaintiff’s allegation in the summons that the parties entered into an agreement of lease in terms of which... More
This is an urgent chamber application for a spoliation order that was filed by the applicant on 12 September 2007. It was allocated to me on 13 September 2007 and I set it down for hearing on 18 September 2007. All the respondents filed opposing papers. The applicant did not have an opportunity to file his answering affidavit as the opposing affidavits were filed on 17 September by the fourth respondent and during the hearing by the first to third respondents (the new farmers). More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. His Heads Of Argument summarised the case as follows;
“1. It is respectfully submitted that Respondent errored (sic) in dismissing Appellant on allegations of incompetence because (to) the job was not done by three surveyors – namely H Chitonje, A Pazvakavambwa and M Mapfumo.
Respondent did not dispute that according to the record of minutes of hearing.
2. We further submit that according to minutes, of (which) it is alleged that Appellant has for a long time been counselled on his shoddy work performance but there is no... More
On 22 September, 2016, we dismissed the above appeal, with each party to bear its own costs. On 16 May, 2017, the appellant wrote a letter to the Registrar asking for the reasons for judgment. This is what prompted us to write this judgment. More
On 22 October 2015 this matter was postponed sine die at the instance of the appellant. Since then the appeal has not been prosecuted giving rise to the impression that the appeal has been abandoned. In terms of section 89 (2) (a) (i) of the Labour Act the court in the exercise of its many functions may decide an appeal on the basis of papers filed of record. It is in the spirit of the above quoted section that the instant judgment is written to dispose of the appeal which was postponed sine die on 22 October 2015. More
As one of his grounds of appeal, Appellant raised the issue of the use of incorrect Code of Conduct. The ground reads:-
“a. We submitted to the hearing committee that we have grave reservations about their employ of the Interfresh Code of Conduct in bringing charges of misconduct against the Appellant.
Our reasoning was based on the mere fact that Section 3 of the Interfresh Code of Conduct provides the following.
The Code of Conduct is applicable to all employees of Interfresh Limited … Managerial up to Senior Management (B1) and none managerial. Employees in grades A4 up to A1... More
on 18th September 2018, I presided over an ex-parte urgent chamber application for stay of execution pending rescission of judgment at the conclusion of which I rendered an ex –tempore judgment dismissing the application. The applicant having appealed these are my written reasons for judgment. More
