Zimbabwe Homeless People Federation, an universitas, Knowledge Tinashe Kwambana and Warship Dumba, natural persons, (“the applicant”) sued the City of Harare and Augur Investments OU (“Augur”), which are the first and second respondents respectively, among other respondents. It moves me to:
(i) declare as a nullity and set aside the Memorandum of Understanding and the Shareholders Agreement which the first and the second respondents (“the parties”) concluded between them on 21 June, 2007 and 4 September, 2007 respectively.
(ii) set aside all transfer of land from the City of Harare to Sunshine Development (Private) Limited, the seventh respondent herein, which... More
The first respondent identified itself as a membership based organisation acting on behalf of all people conducting business in the informal. All persons conducting business in the informal sector are its members. The second applicant is a natural person who is a citizen of Zimbabwe. The respondent is the Minister of Health and Child Care. More
This is an appeal from the magistrate’s court. It is against an order of summary judgment granted in favour of the respondent against the appellant. At the end of the hearing we dismissed the appeal with costs for lack of merit and delivered our judgment ex tempore. The appellant has appealed to the Supreme Court. Written reasons are now required. More
The respondent was employed by the appellant as corporate services manager on a three year fixed term contract. Such contract was to expire on 1 December 2015 when the respondent was dismissed from employment with effect from 9 January 2014. It was found that such dismissal was unfair in an arbitral award of 12 March 2015 and reinstatement without loss of salary and benefits from date of dismissal, was ordered. In the alternative, damages in lieu of reinstatement were awarded. More
The matter was placed before me as a chamber application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against a judgment of this court rendered under reference LC/H/280/23 on the 22nd of September, 2023. The application which is premised on section 92F(2) of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01] as read with Rule 43 of the Labour Court rules, 2017 is opposed by the 1st Respondent. The 2nd Respondent is cited as a nominal Respondent. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Arbitrator. The brief facts are that First Respondent referred his matter to a Labour Officer in terms of section 93 (1) of the Labour Act (Chapter 28:01). At the proceedings, Appellant raised a point in limine to the effect that the matter was prescribed in terms section 94 of the Act and required the Labour Officer to make a determination thereof. The Labour Officer declined to do so. The Labour Officer proceeded to issue a Certificate of No Settlement and the matter was referred to arbitration as provided by statute. The... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award wherein Respondent was awarded payment of cash in lieu of leave days and seven-year service gratuity.
Appellant’s grounds of appeal are that:-
1. The Arbitrator misdirected himself by not meticulously going through the documentary evidence led by Appellant, before awarding a wrong amount of cash in lieu of leave days to the Respondent such a misdirection was so outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at such a conclusion.
2. The... More
The Constitution of Zimbabwe is the supreme law of the land. It is trite that this document is binding on all Zimbabwean citizens, and that, any conduct or action which is inconsistent with it is invalid to the extent of the inconsistency. See s 2 Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment number 20 Act of 2013.1 More
This is a review and an appeal arising out of the decision of the National Employment Council Tobacco Industry Grievance and Disciplinary Committee (“GDC”) handed down on 19 July 2013. The GDC set aside the dismissal of the respondent imposed by the appellant’s Disciplinary Hearing Committee and confirmed by the Works Council. The GDC remitted the matter for another investigation and hearing. More
For what it is, this judgment is meant to be short. This matter was set down on the unopposed roll on 7 November 2023 for provisional sentence. After hearing counsel for the plaintiff and the defendant, I gave my reasons extempore and granted the following order which was in terms of the draft by the plaintiff: More
This is an application for setting aside of an arbitral award in terms of Article 34 (2) (b) (ii) of the Model Law as set out in the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15]. The applicant premises its application on the ground that the arbitral award offends against the public policy of Zimbabwe. The first respondent opposed the setting aside of the arbitral award on the basis that the award is not contrary to the public policy of Zimbabwe. He argued that the amount owing in the sum of US$106 960. 01 ought to be paid at the rate of US$1: ZWL$1... More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award handed down on 24 February 2015. In terms of the award, the appellant was ordered to reinstate the respondent without loss of salary and benefits, on the basis that the probationary assessment that resulted in the termination of his employment was procedurally and substantively unfair.
The factual background to this matteris as follows:
The respondent was employed by the appellant as Director, Management Training Bureau. Management Training Bureau is a training institution under the appellant organisation, and is based in the Msasa Industrial area of Harare. More
