“This matter demonstrates the challenges which emerge from parties pursuing the same issue before different judges who may each be seized with different aspects of their appeals. The result is divergent judgments from the same court. More
This is an application in terms of s301(2) of the Companies Act (Chapter 24:03). The applicant is a member, director and shareholder of 1st respondent. The application is made on an urgent basis in that the 1st respondent and the applicant continue to suffer prejudice due to being unduly placed on judicial management. Applicant therefore seeks discharge of the provisional order for judicial management of the 1st respondent issued on the 19th day of March 2019 under cover of HC 167/19 in that it is not in compliance with section 299 and the requirements of s300 of the Companies Act.... More
This is an application for registration of an order of the Labour Court in terms of section 92B (3) of the Labour Court Act (Chapter 28:01). Applicant contends that, the registration of an order obtained in the Labour Court dated 20th October 2017, per KUDYA J is necessary in order to give effect to the order for the purposes of enforcement. The application is opposed.
The order sought in the draft order is in the following terms:
“1. The court order issued by the Labour Court of Zimbabwe sitting at Harare on the 20th day of October 2017 under case... More
: On 18 September 2018 the applicant filed a court application for review seeking the following relief spelt out in the draft order:
1. The decision of the first respondent in which she made an order for the rescission of default judgment in court case number 127/18 in favour of second respondent be and is set aside.
2. The application of second respondent for rescission of default judgment be remitted for rehearing before a different magistrate.
On 28 September 2018 the second respondent filed its opposing papers. More
Mr James Stewart Drynan (Applicant) filed a court application for review seeking the following relief.
“Having heard the applicant in person and documents filed of record, it is ordered that:
1. The decision of the 1st respondent in civil case 1150/18 be and is set aside.
2. The second respondent’s summons in civil case 1150/18 be and is hereby dismissed.” More
The applicant and others are presently on trial in the High Court on allegations of theft of gold. The applicant faces a charge of defeating or obstruction the course of justice in contravention of section 184 (1) (e) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. This charge arises from investigations into the theft of 28kgs of gold from Plumtree Police station Armoury on 15 August 2018. More
This was an appeal from a decision of the magistrate’s court. We dismissed it soon after argument and gave reasons ex tempore. The appellant has now sought written reasons. More
