This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The record was erroneously kept in the registry instead of it being referred for consideration of judgment. Hence while the matter was heard in October 2012, the judgment is only being considered in January 2013. The confusion regarding the movement of the record is regretted More
The appellant and respondent started staying together as husband and wife in 1969. In 1971 their union was solemnized in terms of the African Marriages Act, [Cap 238], now Customary Marriages Act [Cap 5:07]. In the same year the appellant secured residential accommodation from his employer the Ministry of Health. That property is number 3567 Old Highfields, Harare. The property was a three roomed house. They lived in that house as tenants. More
This is an appeal by the Appellant challenging his dismissal by the Respondent which dismissal was confirmed by the Respondent’s appeals board.
The basic facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows: Appellant was charged with willfully abusing the Respondent’s assets or alternatively conducting himself in a manner inconsistent with the conditions of his employment. In particular it was alleged that the Appellant abused the e-mail facility which ZIMRA, the Respondent had provided him with for business use. Contrary to expectation, he is said to have abused this e-mail facility by sending out to his friends and relatives pornographic... More
On 20th December 2010 the Honourable P Shawatu made an arbitration award. In terms thereof he ordered Appellant to reinstate Respondents’ employment or alternatively to pay them damages for loss of employment. Appellant then appealed to this Court against the award. More
On 9 February 2012, the applicant filed the present application seeking a declaratur and other consequential relief. The application was opposed by the respondent on 12 February 2012. In the opposition, the respondent raised two preliminary points. More
The applicant seeks an order setting aside an arbitral award handed down by the second respondent on 16 August 2010. The applicant avers that the award is in conflict with the public policy of Zimbabwe in the following material respects:
a) “The Arbitrator made a determination on the issues not placed before him for adjudication.”
b) “A breach of the rules of natural justice occurred in connection with the making of the award.”
c) “The award conflicts with the substantive law of Zimbabwe in material respects.” More
