This opposed application was argued on the 9th February, 2017 and the court reserved judgment then. While preparing the judgment it occurred to me that none of the counsels had raised an issue as to whether respondents 4 – 22 were properly before the court as none of them had filed any opposing affidavits or any supporting affidavit making common cause with either second or third Respondents who had purported to be authorised to file opposition on their behalf. This aspect was so pertinent and could not be determined without giving the parties an opportunity to present argument on it.... More
The applicant sought relief in terms of r 449 for the correction of an order granted by this court after a pre- trial conference between the parties. It was alleged that the issued order incorrectly captured the case number and the second, third and fourth respondents were not cited. The application was opposed. The respondents’ opposing affidavits dedicated most of the response to the background of the matter. There was no discernible basis for opposing the application, in fact there was a veiled concession to the granting of the order sought. More
: On 31 March 2021 we dismissed an appeal against both conviction and sentence noted by the appellant. We indicated that our reasons will be availed. These are they.
On 24 December 2020 appellant was convicted of Robbery as defined in s 126 (1)(a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment of which 6 months was suspended for 5 years on condition of future good behaviour. A further 22 months imprisonment was suspended on condition of restitution. More
This is an application for bail pending trial.
The applicant is on remand at the Harare Magistrates Court. He is facing one count of robbery and another count of rape as defined in Sections 126 and 65, respectively, of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] More
This matter is a civil appeal against a judgement entered by a Magistrate sitting at Masvingo.
The respondent issued summons for the eviction of the appellants. An amendment to the summons was later made to include the issue of arrear rentals. The issues agreed to be determined at the trial were as follows:
a) Whether the Plaintiff required the houses to house its employees
b) Whether the Plaintiffhad been recapitalised to commence operations More
This is a bail application lodged by the applicant after the first application was refused in this court. The first application was refused on the 27 August 2020. The applicant is now applying for bail on the basis of new facts. He is jointly charged with four other persons. The five are charged with the crime of robbery as defined in section 126(b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. The allegations are that; applicant, a member of the Zimbabwe National Army, in connivance with his accomplices executed an armed robbery at Inyathi, approximately sixty kilometres from... More
Respondent’s (employer) Executive Chairman wrote a letter dated 30th March 2020 to Appellant (employee). The contents show that the employee was demoted after disciplinary proceedings. The employee then appealed to this court against both the verdict and penalty. More
