In this matter Counsel for the first respondent raised a point in limine to the effect that the appellant having been barred in the court a quo for failure to file his heads of argument, had no right of audience before this court. More
The plaintiff’s claim is for damages for malicious arrest and detention allegedly arising from the second defendant’s action of laying a charge of theft against the plaintiff at Marimba Police Station. More
The applicant seeks the following order -
“1…………..
2. The 1st Respondent is hereby declared and consequently confirmed as a substantive
Divisional Intelligence Officer in the employ of the 2nd Respondent with effect from
1st July 2013.
3. Consequently, Respondents jointly and severally are ordered to reflect the records
of the Applicant as such as per paragraph 1 of this order, including updating and
paying entitlements applicable to the position of Divisional Intelligence Officer
effective 1st of July 2013.
4. The Respondents pay costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale jointly and
severally the one paying the... More
The applicant a business entity, applied for leave to institute a Class Action in terms of s 3 of the Class Actions Act [Chapter 8:17](hereinafter referred to as “the Act”)against the respondent. More
I reserved judgment in this application on 4 December, 2015. Owing to my redeployment to the Criminal Division in January, 2016 where I am still deployed, I could not timeously deliver my judgment because of the volume of work obtaining in the criminal division. I do acknowledge the follow up letters which have been written by the applicants’ legal practitioners following up on the judgment. The delay is regretted. I however note that there has not been any undue prejudice occasioned to the applicant because the rights he seeks to assert and protect are in fact protected by a provisional... More
