The matter was heard as an appeal against an arbitral award handed down by the Honourable Mugumisi on 21 August 2010.
The background facts to the matter are as follows;
The Appellant was employed by the Respondent as a Personal Assistant to the Managing Director. Through a letter dated 24 June, 2009 Appellant was advised of the abolition of the position owing to low business volumes and a restructuring exercise. She then raised a grievance regarding the manner in which the matter had been handled by the Respondent. When Respondent failed to respond, she referred a complaint to the labour... More
The appeal in the matter is against the minimum mandatory sentence imposed on the appellant for illegal possession of gold in contravention of s 3 (1) as read with s 36 of the Gold Trade Act, [Cap 21:03].(“the Gold Trade Act,”) (“the Act”). More
This is an application for review and an appeal against the decision of the Respondent’s Company’s appeals Board which confirmed the Appellant/Applicant’s dismissal following allegations of wilful disobedience to a lawful order and being absent from work for more than 5 days in a year without lawful excuse. More
The appellant a 40 year old first offender was properly convicted after contest of contravening s 4 (a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Cap. 9:16]. The appellant who was employed as a Finance, Administration and Human Resources Executive by the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Holdings corruptly appointed Raphnok Investments P/L as an advertising agent well knowing that it was not his duty to make such an appointment and that the company did not qualify for such appointment. More
On 24 July, 2012, the Appellant’s Legal Practitioner applied for a postponement saying he had just been engaged and he needed time to take instructions and file relevant papers. The Respondent’s representative opposed the application and said this was a delaying tactic by the Appellant who has always been aware of the case and should have sought counsel earlier. He said the Respondent was being prejudiced by the delay. After hearing arguments, the Court granted the postponement but ruled that this would be the last postponement at the instance of the Appellant. More
This was an urgent chamber application. Upon reading it my instinctive reaction was to frown upon the notion that all other business in the busy schedule of the judiciary could be suspended over a mere school leavers’ dance or party.At first impression it seemed such aninconsequential pre-occupation which should not warrant the attention of the machinery of State. However, for a school and its student body the dance must be a serious matter. Suchan event may be an integral part of its life and for its students as well. For sixth formers in particular an event like that, I believe,... More
This is an application for rescission of a judgment granted under case number HC 13281/12, brought in terms of Order 9, Rule 63 of the High Court Rules 1971. At the hearing of the matter, I dismissed the application with costs and indicated that my reasons for so doing would follow. These are the reasons: More
