This is an application for exception.
On 9 January 2012 the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant for the following relief:
“(a) payment of US$88 500-00 the balance due to the plaintiff for his salary;
(b) interest at the prescribed rate per annum from 1 April 2010 to date of full payment; and
(c) costs of suit on the level of legal practitioner and client scale.” More
This is an opposed chamber application for reinstatement of an appeal under case number SC 166/22. The application is brought consequent to the applicant’s failure to file his heads of argument within the prescribed time limits. More
At the conclusion of this case after hearing argument, I granted the following order in favour of the applicant:
“It is ordered:
(i) That the appeal instituted by the applicant in this court on 14 October 2011 in case number HC CIV ‘A’ 522/11 and dismissed on 16 July 2013 be and is hereby reinstated.
(ii) That there shall be no order as to costs.” More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (“the court a quo”) dated 28 February 2023. In that judgment, the court a quo dismissed the appellant’s application for review of the respondent’s decision to withdraw his offer letter in respect of Subdivision 3 of Ingleborough Farm in Mazowe (the “farm”). More
By a letter dated 25 June 2013, applicant was offered a piece of land under the Land Reform and Resettlement Programme (Model A2 Phase II) by respondent.
The offer was in respect of Subdivision 3 of Ingleborough in Mazowe District of Mashonaland Central Province and for agricultural purpose. The piece of land (farm) was 253.00 hectares in extent.
By a letter dated 29 June 2021 respondent notified applicant of its intention to withdraw the land offer in respect of the farm.
The letter reads:-
“RE: NOTICE OF INTENTION TO WITHDRAW LAND OFFER PHASE II
Notice is hereby given that the... More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Harare Magistrates Court (Civil) handed down on 1 March 2022 under Case number 1/22 which dismissed an application for mandament van spolie made by the Appellant against the respondents for illegally ousting Appellant from Stand number 13559 Manresa Mabvuku, Harare (the property).
The background facts are that there has been a dispute between the Appellant and the respondents over the property in question. Under case number 2689/20 an Order was granted against the Appellant in favour of the respondents to evict the Appellant from the stand in question. Pursuant to... More
I heard this matter on 16 May, 2022. I delivered an ex tempore judgment in which I granted the application as prayed. On 23 May, 2022 the respondent wrote requesting written reasons for my decision. These are they:
The respondent, a municipality which is established in accordance with the Urban Council Act, sold to the first, second, third and fourth applicants stand numbers 1051, 1043, 1044 and 1052 (“ the property/properties”) respectively. It sold the first two properties to the first and second applicants on 13 November, 2019 and the last two properties to the third and fourth applicants on... More
After hearing the parties on 11 July 2017 the following pronouncement was made by the Court:
“The unanimous view of this court is that there is no merit in this appeal. The appeal be and is hereby dismissed with costs. Full reasons for judgment will be availed in due course” More
This is an application for bail pending the finalisation of trial. Applicant is being charged with the crime of contravening section 60 A (3a) (b) of the Electricity Act [Chapter 13:19] i.e. to cut, damage, destroy or interfere with any apparatus used for generation, transmission, distribution or supply of electricity. The allegations are that on the 23rd March 2020, during the night and at a bushy area along Mzingwani Road, stretching to Alwyn Road, Hope Fountain, Bulawayo, applicant unlawfully and intentionally cut, damaged, destroyed or interfered with any apparatus or material used in connection, distribution or supply of electricity. He... More
This is an application for leave to appeal against the decision of this Court that was handed down on 5 June 2020. This Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of the appeals officer to dismiss him from work for engaging in fraud and or theft in the course of his employment.
The applicant’s grounds for this application are that
(i) This court did not canvass the essential elements oftheft or fraud.
(ii) There are prospects of success as there was circumstantial evidence.
The Respondent in responseargued that the essential elements of theft/fraud had been proved through the evidence... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the designated appeals officer D. Murindagomo that was issued on 5 May 2019. This appeal was noted in accordance with the Supreme Court order dated 3 October 2019 in Case No. 865/18. More
1. This is an application for quantification of damages in lieu of reinstatement. It follows after a successful appeal to the Supreme Court which court ordered the reinstatement of the applicant failing which reinstatement, payment of damages. More
The defendant acting through its insurance broker BGI Financial Services (Private) Limited entered into agreement with the plaintiff the terms of which were that the plaintiff would repair vehicles belonging to the aforementioned insurance company’s insured clients at an agreed cost which the defendant would pay. During the period May 2014 to August 2015 the defendant through the said insurance broker referred its various clients to plaintiff for motor vehicle repairs which repairs were effected by the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims through its director Mr Allen Jones that the outstanding costs for such repairs amounted to the sum of USD12... More
This is a matter in which the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant and claimed various amounts itemised in its declaration as follows:
‘(i) 24 714,77 being unpaid money for the construction of a new deli stores area.
(ii) $16 979,42 being unpaid money for the supply and installation of a full fire scope
system
(iii) $17 801,42 being unpaid retention fee for electrical works
(iv) Interest at the prescribed rate on the claims in (i), (ii), (iii) above from 31st
July, 2014.
(v) Costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale. More
At the close of this trial Counsel indicated that they preferred filing written closing submissions. I then directed counsel for the defendant to file his written closing submissions by 17 September 2007. As I write this judgment it is now the 3rd of October 2007 with no submissions having been filed by counsel in spite of a written reminder from his opponent dated 1 October 2007. There has also been no explanation for the default. In the absence of an explanation for the default, I can only assume that counsel for the Defendant has no meaningful submissions to make. Having... More
