The first and second applicants in this application are first and third respondents in case No. HC4168/14 wherein Roselyn Murambiwa as executrix dative (Estate Late Phillip Murambiwa) is the applicant. Case NO. HC 4168 is the main case brought as a court application. In case No. HC 4168/14, the applicant sought the reversal of transfer of an immovable property in Karoi which she wants to be included in the estate of her late husband. The property was alledgedly purchased by the respondents who took transfer. More
MABHIKWA J: The plaintiff issued summons against the defendant. She alleged that she and the defendant were married in terms of Shona custom in December 2006. She said that the defendant is therefore her estranged customary law husband. The parties are now living separately and not as husband and wife. There are three minor children born of the union namely Byron Sydwell, Darrel Sydwell and Mia Sydwell Nsingo.
During the subsistence of the said union, there developed and existed a “tacit universal partnership between the parties wherein the two were equal partners. The plaintiff was employed by Exortica Nurseries from... More
MAMBARA J: This matter was set down on the unopposed roll after the defendant’s plea was struck out for non-attendance at the pre-trial conference and her subsequent application for rescission was deemed abandoned. Liability is therefore not in issue; the court is seized only with the assessment of quantum under r 25(1) of the High Court Rules, 2021.
The plaintiff seeks US $50 000, broken down into US $30 000 for contumelia and US $20 000 for loss of consortium, arising from a protracted adulterous relationship between the defendant and the plaintiff’s husband that began in 2019, produced two children,... More
The Plaintiff and the Defendant (the parties) are husband and wife having married each other in 1989. Their marriage was solemnized under the Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11] now the Marriages Act [ Chapter 5:17] on 7 August 1989 at Harare. On 6 March 2019, Plaintiff issued out summons claiming an order for a decree of divorce and ancillary relief. In her declaration she averred that the marriage of the parties had irretrievably broken down and there are no prospects of restoration of a normal marriage between them. The reason for the break down was given as physical and emotional abuse... More
The appeal was lodged against the determination by the Group Chief Executive Officer to dismiss the Appellant from employment following herconviction on a charge of violating category C (v) of the Zimbabwe Newspapers (1980)Limited Code of Conduct that is “insolence towards a subordinate, colleague, superior or clients by act, words or demeanor.” More
In 1996 the plaintiff and the defendant entered into an unregistered customary law marriage.Their union was blessed with one child born on 29 January 2009. More
This is an opposed application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against an order issued by this Court on the 11th of March, 2025 under case number LC/H/68-25 and order number LCHORD 226-25. The application is brought in terms of section 92 F of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01], as read with Rule 43 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. More
Applicant applied for condonation of a belated application for leave to appeal this Court’s judgment referenced LCH 84/23 to the Supreme Court. Respondent opposed the application.
At the onset of oral argument the Court pressed applicant to cite the legal basis for the application. This was in light of the fact that the Court has previously in a different matter ruled that there is no legal basis for such an application in the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Applicant’s response was to apply for directions under Rule 32 on the basis that there is a lacuna in the Rules. More
Applicant applied for condonation of a belated application for leave to appeal this Court’s judgment referenced LCH 84/23 to the Supreme Court. Respondent opposed the application.
At the onset of oral argument the Court pressed applicant to cite the legal basis for the application. This was in light of the fact that the Court has previously in a different matter ruled that there is no legal basis for such an application in the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Applicant’s response was to apply for directions under Rule 32 on the basis that there is a lacuna in the Rules. More
On the 27th July 2023 this Court issued an order which struck off the roll applicant’s application for leave to appeal “as it was filed out of time.” On the 15th July 2024 applicant requested reasons for the order. More
This is an application for the removal of the Executrix Dative on the grounds that the first respondent has abdicated her duties since her appointment in 2014 to administer the estate of the late Remusi Machokoto. More
On 24 March 2009, the first defendant consented to the substitution of the plaintiff for her husband who died after litis contestatio. The full history of this case is reported in Chikadaya v Chikadaya & Ors 2000 (1) ZLR 343 (HC) and its sequel cyclostyled judgments of Chikadaya v Chikadaya & City Council of Harare SC 58/2001 and Chikadaya v Chikadaya & City Council of Harare HH 1 /2002. More
The matter before the Court is for Divorce. The parties have been married to each other for over two decades in terms of the Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11]. The marriage was blessed with two children namely who are now both major. The Parties have agreed that the marriage has irretrievably broken down and that divorce should be granted. The parties concluded that the household property be awarded to the Plaintiff. More
This is an appeal in terms of s 68J of the Administration of Estates Act [Chapter 6:01] against the Master’s finding that the first respondent was a customary law wife to the late Josphat Whacha. More
