On 24 May 2018 Tafadzwa Gwata and Tapiwa Tsamba (the accused) appeared before Guruve resident magistrate charged with the crime of contravening s 189 as read with s 114 (2) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. It was alleged that on 1 May 2018 and at Omeath 2 C Extension, Mvurwi the two unlawfully and intentionally attempted to take one bull the property of an unknown person knowing that the State is entitled to own possess or control the property intending to deprive the State of its ownership, possession or control of the property. More
The accused was charged with rape. He pleaded not guilty. He was not represented. He was convicted and sentenced to 13 years imprisonment with 2 years suspended for 5 years on the usual condition of good behaviour. We think the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction. More
The accused (31) was charged with and convicted of rape as defined in s 65 (1) of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act [Chapter 9:23] for raping his sister-in-law, the wife to his young brother on 13 April 2018 in her bedroom at village one Nyamugomba, Chinhoyi during the night. More
The companies failed to pay off their respective debts. The respondent successfully sued the applicant and others under HC 3254/12. Judgment was entered in its favour in the sum of $21 336.01 together with interest thereon at the rate of 10% above the bank overdraft rate with effect from 17 February, 2012 to the date of full payment. It also successfully sued the applicant and others under HC 8650/12 wherein judgment was entered in its favour in the sum of $206 253.93 together with interest at 45% per annum with effect from 10 April, 2013 to the date of full... More
The plaintiff’s issued summons against the defendant for the payment of $208 839.98 (two hundred and eight thousand eight hundred and thirty nine dollars and ninety eight cents) being retrenchment benefits, interest thereon at the prescribed rate and costs of suit on the attorney- client scale. When the matter was called for trial, defendant objected to the jurisdiction of this Court arguing that the plaintiff’s cause of action is in the form of a Labour dispute exclusively resolvable in terms section 89 of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. The objection in limine was opposed by the plaintiff More
