This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (“the court a quo”) sitting at Harare, dated 19 October 2022 dismissing the appellant’s claim for specific performance of a verbal contract it had entered into with the respondent, alternatively, if specific performance is no longer feasible, cancellation of the contract and an award of damages for breach of contract. More
Harare the capital city of Zimbabwe has experienced an increase in the population of vehicles. More poignantly, there is a large volume of cars that goes into the central business district almost on a daily basis including weekends. This increase necessitated the introduction of a parking management system. What is astounding however is that the defendant after flighting an expression of interest for the provision of such, almost casually engaged the plaintiff and after some discussions, they entered into a verbal agreement. Although various reasons were given by both parties on why the contract was not reduced to writing, the... More
The seven applicants are Chinese nationals. On the 23rd of December 2018, the applicants were arrested at Victoria Falls and charged on the first count with contravening section 45 (1) (b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act (Chapter 25:14), that is, acquire, use or possess rhino horns. On the second count the applicants were charged with violating section 8(3) as read with section 8(8) of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act (Chapter 9:24), i.e. unlawfully acquire, use or possess property knowing or suspecting at the time of receipt that such property is the proceeds of crime. The applicants... More
The plaintiff Zenus Banda who will in this judgment be referred to as the plaintiff, was the first defendant’s tenant for many years before she decided to sale the property number 5, 7th Avenue Parktown, Waterfalls, Harare. More
This matter was struck off the roll on 17 October 2023. Appellant’s legal practitioners have requested for reasons therefore. This Court makes the observation that these reasons were only requested after an application for reinstatement of this matter was also struck off the roll on 21 March 2024 as being improperly before the Court. However, the following are the reasons as requested by the Appellant’s legal practitioners. More
This is an urgent chamber application in terms of which applicant seeks the following relief in the provisional order sought:
A. Interim Relief Granted:
(1) 1st and 2nd respondents be and are hereby ordered to act on 2nd respondent’s directive of the 28th January 2022 and also to take all measures necessary to stop all illegal mining activities on appellant’s mining claim being SC 6856 Mvuma.
(2) 3rd respondent be and is hereby directed to show 1st and 2nd respondents the boundaries of applicant’s mining claim.
B. Terms of Final Order sought:
(1) The 1st and 2nd respondents be and... More
Following the dismissal of two misconduct charges preferred against the respondent by an independent disciplinary authority, the appellant appealed to the Labour Court (“the court a quo”) which, by judgment delivered on 22 October 2021 struck the appeal off the roll. The basis for doing so was that an employer has no right of appeal against a decision of a disciplinary authority. This appeal is against that judgment of the court a quo. More
This is an appeal against part of the judgment of the Labour Court wherein the appellant was partially successful. In particular, the appellant challenges those parts of the judgment relating to the payment of school fees and fuel allowances and the allocation of personal issue motor vehicles to certain members of the respondent association. More
The respondent was employed by the appellant until 31 October 2013 when parties mutually terminated the employment contract. A dispute ensued in respect of the package payable to the respondent. More
A brief history of the matter should help put it into perspective. The respondent won an arbitral award handed down by Arbitrator A.J. Manase sometime in July 2013, in terms of which his retrenchment by the applicant company was nullified.
On 23 September 2013, the applicant filed an appeal in this Court, against the arbitral award. On 20 November 2013, a default judgment was issued by Honourable Judge Murasi, in terms of which applicant’s appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award handed down on 22 September, 2011. The Respondent was employed by the Appellant as a Messenger from April 2006 under a Grade B1 salary. In April 2010 the Respondent was transferred from the Head Office to work at the Training Centre as a Workshop Assistant. It is common cause that the person he replaced at the Training Centre took his job as a Messenger and was downgraded from Grade B3 to B1. More
The appellant appeals against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) dated 17 November 2021. The court a quo found that the arbitral award by second respondent (the arbitrator), dated 2 December 2020, was not in conflict with the public policy of Zimbabwe. On 2 December 2020, the arbitrator held that he had the jurisdiction to determine the quantification of damages in lieu of his earlier arbitral award against the appellant for specific performance that had been registered by the High Court on 10 June 2020. Consequent upon assuming jurisdiction, the arbitrator further directed the appellant... More
This is an application for review of the first respondent’s decision on an interlocutory issue. The parties appeared before the first respondent, a labour officer, on a matter referred to the labour officer in terms of section 101 (6) of the Labour Act, Chapter 28:01 [the Act]. The applicant herein raised points in liminebefore the Labour officer and the decision went against it. More
