The appellant was charged with and convicted of having contravened s 368 of the Mines and Minerals Act [Chapter 21:05] it having been alleged and proven that he unlawfully prospected for gold without a license. Section 368 of that Act reads:-
“368 Prospecting prohibited save in certain circumstances
(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), no person shall prospect or search for any mineral, mineral oil or natural gas except in the exercise of rights granted under a prospecting license, exclusive prospecting order or special grant or unless he is the duly authorized representative of the holder of such license,... More
The first, second and third respondents have through their legal practitioners requested that I prepare and avail my reasons for the provisional order which I granted in favour of the applicant on 21 September 2017. This application is one of those unusual ones where family members fight each other tooth and nail over earthly riches. More
At the centre of this dispute is a company called WENTSO MILLING (PVT) LTD. The company is duly registered and incorporated in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe, which company operates a regulated gold mining and milling business in the Shamva area of Mashonaland Central in Zimbabwe. The company though a legal persona was not cited in these proceedings. The company was founded by the applicant WENDALL ROBERT PARSON and the third respondent VINYU TSOKA from where the name was derived- “Wen” for Wendall and “tso” for Tsoka. The applicant claims to be a 60% shareholder and director in the... More
: The brief background to the matter is that the parties had an employer-employee relationship from October 2002 to October 2014. During the course of the relationship, the respondent was entitled to the use of a motorvehicle namely Mazda BT50 registration number ABI-6903 (the motor vehicle). The motor vehicle is owned by the applicant. On 3 October 2014, the applicant commenced a procedure to retrench the respondent. More
This is an application for rescission of a judgment granted in default in a matter concerning revocation of a donation made by a parent to child. The applicant denies being in default on account of the fact that the summons were never served upon him at his last known address in accordance with the rules. More
This is an application made in terms of article 34 of the Model Law which is
the second Schedule to the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15] (hereinafter referred to simply as
the Model Law), for the setting aside of an arbitral award made by the Arbitrator on the
grounds set out by the applicant in its founding affidavit. More
