Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by year
This matter comes before this Court as an appeal against Respondent’s decision to convict and dismiss the Appellant from its employment. More

The plaintiff and defendant are husband and wife respectively. They married each other at Harare on 27 June 2006 in terms of the Marriage Act [Cap 5:11]. The marriage was blessed with one minor child Tafadzwa Gova, a male, born on 25 October 2007. More

Through a Chamber Application filed on 3 April 2011 the respondent obtained the following default judgement: More

Applicant applied for “reinstating my appeal on grievances.” Respondent opposed the application. The application was not in the proper form. More

This is an appeal from an arbitral award. At the onset of the proceedings counsel for the Respondent raised a point in limine that there is no appeal before this court. He submitted that an appeal to this court in matters of this nature lies on a point of law in terms of Section 98(10) of the Labour Act (Chapter 28:01). Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the grounds of appeal as raised by the Respondent raises no points of law and the matter should be struck off the roll. More

The facts that gave rise to this dispute are as follows: In January 2010 the first applicant Givemore Sambadzi, purchased certain immovable property known as Stand 2048 Chadcombe township of Stand 1257 Chadcombe Township from one Charity Nyarai Mupaya and a Deed of Transfer was made in his favour. In November 2010, the first applicant then entered into an agreement of sale with the second applicant Salatiel Nhubu regarding this property. More

The brief facts are that Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a forester. His duties involved raising invoices on work done. Appellant raised invoices for work which was either not done at all or if done not properly done. Invoices were raised and paid for work allegedly done on compartment 045. In reality no work was done on that compartment. He also raised invoices for work done on compartment number Nyr108 when certain corrections needed to be done on that compartment. Invoices were only to be raised on satisfactory completion of work done. As a result Appellant was charged... More