The above two (2) matters involving the same parties arise from the same facts. They were set down for hearing on the same day before me. On the date of hearing the parties agreed to argue the 1st case only as its determination would necessarily dispose of the second application. The parties therefore as per their agreement argued the application under cover of case number HC 823/19. It is an application in terms of Order 9 Rule 63 of the High Court Rules 1971. It seeks an order setting aside a default judgment of this court granted in case number... More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court dismissing an application by the appellants for a declaratory order and consequential relief pertaining to various fundamental rights, in particular, the right of children to shelter. The application was dismissed with no order as to costs. More
The respondents are husband and wife. They are before this Court pursuant to a suit for defamation instituted by them in the High Court against the appellants herein. In the declaration, the first respondent is described as an Ambassador. It is a description which appears common cause. The first appellant is the editor of the Newsday Newspaper, with the second appellant being the publisher, printer and distributer of the publication. More
The two applicants are Members of Parliament. They brought two separate applications in terms of s 167(2)(d) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 20) 2013 (“the Constitution”), as read with r 27 of the Constitutional Court Rules. They alleged failure by Parliament to fulfil the constitutional obligation to act in accordance with the procedure for amending the Constitution prescribed by s 328 of the Constitution. The allegations in the applications are the same. So are the issues. More
This is a chamber application for an order for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court (“the Court”) against a decision of the Supreme Court (“the court a quo”). The application is made in terms of r 32(2) of the Constitutional Court Rules S.I. 61/2016 (“the Rules”). More
This Court is seized with two applications which have been consolidated. The first application (case number HC 584/2020) sought the setting aside of an arbitral award, while the second application (case number HC 366/2020) sought the registration of the same award. More
