This was an application for bail pending appeal. It was opposed. I dismissed it soon after argument and gave reasons ex tempore. The applicants say they want to appeal. So they have asked for written reasons. Here they are. More
This is an application for rescission of judgment in terms of Order 49 Rule 449 (a) of the High Court Rules, 1971. The application is opposed by the respondent who contends that the application is entirely devoid of any merit.
Factual background
Inspite of the voluminous nature of the application before this court the facts giving rise to this application may be summerised for convenience as follows. The applicants filed a court application on 5th April 2018 and served it on the respondent on 16th April 2018. Despite having filed their answering affidavit on the 11th of July 2018 and... More
This was an appeal against sentence only. In the court a quo the appellant was unrepresented. She was convicted on her own plea of guilty to contravening s 82(1) of the Parks and Wild Life (General) Regulations of 1990 (SI 362 of 1990) (“the Parks Regulations”), as read with s 128 of the Parks and Wildlife Act, Cap 20:14 (“the Act”). These provisions relate to the illegal possession of ivory. More
This was a civil appeal. It was from a decision of the magistrate’s court at Kwekwe, Midlands Province. We dismissed it for lack of merit soon after argument and gave reasons ex tempore. This now is our detailed judgment. More
This was an action matter. On the date of trial, it was postponed sine die by consent. The defence had raised a special plea of prescription. The plaintiff was not conceding it. In terms of a timetable agreed upon, the parties would file their written submissions. Judgment on prescription would be delivered on the papers. This now is that judgment. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High court handed down on 11 October 2018, dismissing the appellants’ application with costs on the higher scale. More
This is an appeal against a decision of the Respondent’s Chief Executive Officer as the appellate body of the respondent which upheld the decision to dismiss the appellant from employment.
Having been aggrieved by the decision to dismiss him, the appellant appeals to this court on the following grounds:
(i) The employer grossly erred in convicting the Appellant in terms of Statutory Instrument 15/2006 yet the appellant was served with changes relating to Statutory Instrument 67/2012.
(ii) The appellant was charged with a non-existent offence.
(iii) There was inequality before the law.
(iv) There was no evidence warranting conviction.
(v)... More
