In this application the applicant applies for bail pending appeal based on changed circumstances following the dismissal of his previous application by MUREMBA J on 13 December, 2017 in a judgment recorded as HH 216/18. On 22 February, 2018, the applicant acting in person, filed an application which was however withdrawn by his legal practitioners after assuming agency. They then filed the present application on 2 March, 2018. The legal practitioners requested of MUREMBA J for reasons for her order dismissing the previous application. MUREMBA J duly supplied the said reasons as judgment HH 216/18 as already indicated. On 12... More
The applicant was discharged from the Zimbabwe Republic Police on 30 December 2014 by the second respondent, the Commissioner General of Police in terms of the Police Act [Chapter 11:10] after having been declared a deserter. More
The applicant approached this court seeking a declarator in the following terms:
That,
1. The discharge of the applicant from the Zimbabwe Republic Police by the first and second respondents be and is hereby declared unlawful and wrongful.
2. The first and second respondents are ordered to reinstate the applicant with full benefits from the date of discharge to the date of reinstatement.
3. The respondents are ordered to pay costs of suit. More
The applicant applied for a declaratur. He moved the court to declare that:
i. his trial under the Police Act for the offence he was tried under ordinary law which amounted to dual prosecution be declared unlawful - and
ii. his discharge from the Police Service following his conviction under the Police Act for the offence he was acquitted of under ordinary law be declared unlawful. More
This is an application for an order that the alleged refusal or failure of the respondents to furnish the applicant with reasons for her discharge be declared to be unlawful and for the setting aside of the discharge of the applicant from the Zimbabwe Republic Police consequent upon the finding, as prayed for, that the discharge is wrongful and unlawful. The applicant also seeks costs against the respondents on the attorney-client scale. The application is opposed by the first respondent. More
This is a claim for damages arising out of the arrest and detention of the plaintiff by members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police on 10 October 2016. In the summons the plaintiff claims a sum of US$12 000 as damages for “illegal arrest, detention and infringing (of) the plaintiff’s constitutional rights in terms of s 50(1) and (2), 51 and 70(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 20) Act 2013”. More
The plaintiff is a company registered in terms of the law of Zimbabwe. Its core business is trucking and construction work and trades as an independent contractor. More
