TAKUVA J: This is an urgent chamber application for leave to execute the judgment in case number HC 24/21 handed down by MOYO J on the 3rd of March 2021 pending the appeal filed in the Supreme Court by the 1st respondent under cover of case number SCB-09-21. More
This matter came to me as an urgent chamber application set for hearing on 17 April 2017. The matter was indeed heard on that day. However, the parties sought to and the court allowed them to, file further written submissions and/or heads of arguments.
Applicant filed his Heads of argument on 29 April 2019. 1st respondent did not file any submissions whilst 2nd respondent filed his “written submissions” on 3 May 2019. Thereafter, applicant filed a response to 2nd respondent’s written submissions on 10 May 2019. On 16 May 2019 the applicant wrote a letter to enquire as to whether... More
The property situate Stand 2468 Mkoba 7 Township in Gweru (“the property”) was at all relevant times owned by the fifth respondent, Gweru City Council. However, one Honest Pepolo was apparently buying it from Gweru City Council in terms of one of those standard term lease-to-buy agreements. Apparently in June 2004 Pepolo sold his rights and interest to one Claudio Chakanetsa, now deceased (“the deceased”). In these proceedings his estate was cited as the first respondent, duly represented by the executor. More
The appellant was convicted of fraud and was sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment of which 2 years were suspended for 5 years on condition of future good behaviour. The remaining 1 year was suspended on condition of paying restitution in the amount of $45 000 by 30 November 2016. Appeal was noted against conviction only. More
It all started as a very simple contractual agreement entered into by the two applicants and the 1st respondent which was duly represented by its chosen agent, National Real Estate (Pvt) Ltd. More
This matter was placed before me through the Chamber Book on 25 January 2012. After I perused the papers I directed that the matter be set down for hearing the next day. On this day the parties addressed me on the issue of urgency. I found the matter to be urgent and the respondents asked for more time to prepare and file their opposing papers which indulgence was granted. The hearing was postponed to 31 January 2012. More
The factual position is that this Court dismissed a court application and a counter claim in HC 1456/20 whose judgment in HH 743/20 was delivered in motion court on the 25th November 2020. On the day the judgment was delivered counsel for the applicant was not present in court despite that he was advised to attend court at 1000hrs earlier on the same day at 9.30am. The reason for his failure to attend court hearing being that he was engaged elsewhere. Dissatisfied with this court’s decisions the applicant is desirous to appeal against this court’s decision to the Supreme Court More
The plaintiff and the defendant purportedly customarily married each other in 1997 or 1998. The customary union was not valid as the plaintiff was still married to another woman in terms of the Marriages Act [Cap 5;11]. The plaintiff’s wife died in April or may of 2001immediately after which the plaintiff and the defendant separated as the plaintiff’s family alleged the defendant had caused the plaintiff’s former wife to commit suicide. She threw herself on to a railway line and was crushed to death by a train. The plaintiff and the defendant resumed their customary union in June 2002 after... More
After hearing argument from counsel, the court was unanimous in granting this application in the following terms:
“1. It is declared that the applicant is not disqualified from standing as a candidate for election as a councillor in the forthcoming municipal elections.
2. There shall be no order as to costs.” More
This matter came as an appeal by the employee against his dismissal by the Respondent company on allegations of contravening the industry code of conduct. On the date of the hearing of the appeal 2 points in limine were raised by the Appellant. It is those points which are the subject matter of this judgment. More
On the 13th August 2014 the court granted an order dismissing the application for condonation of late noting of review filed by the Applicant. The Applicant having requested reasons for the order these are they. More
In a judgment LC/H/278/13 dated the 28th June, 2013, this Court remitted Applicant’s appeal for a re-hearing by an appropriate works council appointed sub-committee. The appeal was to be considered within 45 days of receipt of the judgment. More
