The appellants were convicted of contravening ss 89, 113 and 140 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Cap 9:23]. Each appellant was sentenced to a total of forty four months imprisonment of which twelve months were suspended on condition that they paid restitution to the complainant. This is an appeal against both conviction and sentence. More
On the 18 September 2023 this Court issued a judgement which dismissed applicant’s appeal against his dismissal from employment by respondent. A party wishing to appeal the judgement is guided by the Labour Court Rules 2017 whose Rule 43 provides that
“43(1) An application in terms of section 92F (2) of the Act seeking leave to appeal from any decision of the Court shall be made to the Judge of the Court who made the decision or in his or her absence, from any other Judge, within twenty-one days from the date of that decision.” More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment (for misconduct) by Respondent. The appeal is provided for by section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
The appellant in this case was employed by the Great Zimbabwe University as Sports Officer. He was employed on a fixed term basis and assumed duty on 7 January 2013. More
This is an application for a declaratory order and consequential relief in the form of specific performance. The application is opposed. The order sought is in the following terms;
1. the application is hereby granted.
2. It is hereby declared that:
2.1 a valid agreement of sale entered into in 2017 exists between the Applicant and Respondent over Stand 815 Sumben of Sumben Housing Project, Mount Pleasant, Harare, measuring 2,000 square metres (‘the stand’ or ‘property’); and
2.2 The applicant has a contractual right to specific performance of the agreement of sale. More
At the hearing of this matter respondent raised a point in limine which is the subject of this judgment.
This is an appeal against the decision of the respondent’s Appeals Committee to uphold the dismissal penalty meted on appellant by the Disciplinary Committee. Appellant was a Boilermaker with the Respondent. He was charged with negligence or responsibility for a wrongful act or omission that causes accidents, injury or death at work. He was accused of failing to make an assessment of the specific risks that could befall him and his assistant when they were using a crane to lift a... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Designated Agent who ruled that appellant’s backpay benefits were convertible to local currency at the rate of 1 to 1. The appellant filed the following grounds.
1) The Designated Agent erred in finding that the appellant’s backpay and benefits were convertible to local currency at the rate of 1 to 1 despite the fact that liability only came into existence after the effective date of SI 33/19
2) The Designated Agent erred in not finding that the respondent had made unlawful deductions from the appellant’s backpay and benefits and in not... More
On 18 September 2020 the appellant was convicted of the offence of assault as defined in s 89 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. He was duly sentenced to 12 months imprisonment of which 3 months imprisonment were suspended for 5 years on condition the appellant does not commit any offence involving assault for which he is sentenced to imprisonment without the option of a fine. Effective 9 months imprisonment. His co-accused both minors both had passing of sentence postponed. Dissatisfied with the sentence only the appellant lodged the present appeal with this court.... More
The matter be and is hereby remitted for the court a quo to determine the following issues:
a) Whether damages should be awarded to the respondent for the period March 2009 to March 2019 payable at the rate of 1:1 between the US Dollar and the Zimbabwean dollar or at the prevailing inter-bank rate.
b) The damages and back-pay in lieu of reinstatement taking into account mitigatory factors, if any.
c) Whether the respondent should be paid back-pay for the period 11 October 2012 to 12 March 2018 during which he did not prosecute his appeal. More
Applicant indicated that he was approaching the court in terms of s 25 of the Administration of Estates Act and High Court Rule 449(a). Section 25 of the Administration of Estates Act deals with the appointment of an executor. Applicant is not seeking the appointment of an executor. Rule 449(a) dealt with the correction, variation and rescission of a judgment obtained erroneously, in the absence of the affected party. The application was filed on 3 January 2022. Applicant ought to have referred to section 29 of the 2021 rules, Statutory Instrument 202 of 2021. Considering that both parties were not... More
Appellant pleaded guilty to the offence of contravening section 10 (7) of the Domestic Violence Act [Chapter 5:16] (fail to comply with terms and conditions of a protection order). More
The appellant was charged with and convicted of having contravened s 368 of the Mines and Minerals Act [Chapter 21:05] it having been alleged and proven that he unlawfully prospected for gold without a license. Section 368 of that Act reads:-
“368 Prospecting prohibited save in certain circumstances
(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), no person shall prospect or search for any mineral, mineral oil or natural gas except in the exercise of rights granted under a prospecting license, exclusive prospecting order or special grant or unless he is the duly authorized representative of the holder of such license,... More
Plaintiff married defendant at Mutare in terms of the Marriage Act, [Chapter 5:11] on 30 August 1994. On 13 June 2017 he caused summons for divorce and ancillary issues to be issued. There are no minor children. Parties agree that the marriage relationship between them has irretrievably broken down to an extent that there is no hope of restoration of a normal relationship. During the duration of the marriage the parties acquired an immovable property being Stand 5216 Zimta Park, Mutare. The parties have agreed that in the event of a decree of divorce being granted by this court the... 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. More
