Matiyashe, for the respondent
DUBE-BANDA J: Before me is an urgent chamber application. This application was launched in this court on 17thJune 2021. It was placed before me and I directed that it be served on the respondents together with a notice of set down for 2nd July 2021. The application is opposed by the 1strespondent. The 2nd and 3rdrespondents are cited in their official capacities because the implementation of the order sought by the applicant, if granted may require their services. The applicant seeks the following relief: More
This is an application for confirmation of a draft ruling. The application is made in terms of section 93 (5a) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] ( “The Act” ).
History
When the matter initially came before the Labour Court, the 2nd respondent raised some constitutional issues and the matter was referred to the constitutional court, the constitutional Court struck the matter off its Roll.
The matter was then set down again before the Labour Court for the court to deal with the merits of the application. More
This matter was placed before me as an urgent chamber application during the lockdown period. I directed that the respondent files its notice of opposition and opposing affidavit and that all parties file heads of argument to enable me to make a determination on the papers. More
The applicant seeks an order compelling the second respondent to sign all documents necessary to cause the transfer of certain 56 pieces of land constituting an aggregate 60 hectares, to the applicant. In the event of the second respondent failing to comply with such order within seven (7) days of it being granted, the applicant wants the Sheriff ordered to sign all documents necessary to achieve that transfer. Additionally, the applicant seeks costs of suit on the legal practitioner and client scale against both respondents. The respondents opposed the application. More
This is an application referred to by the applicant as “Court Application for the Second Revival of Temporary Variation of Bail Conditions in B1836/19: HH 735/19” being made in terms of s126 (1) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07] (the Act). The application was initially not opposed. On 3 May 2021, I directed that the parties file supplementary heads of argument on whether or not this court has jurisdiction to determine the application. More
This is an application for confirmation of a ruling by a labour officer. The application is in terms of section 93(5a) and (5b) of the Labour Act, [Chapter 28:01]. (The Act). The application arises from a ruling where the 2nd respondent claimed that he had constructively been unlawfully dismissed. He sought to be paid damages thereof and terminal benefits. The claim of constructive dismissal was dismissed. However he was awarded terminal benefits of payment for leave days. Although he had claimed 43, 46 leave days he was granted 33, 95 as said to be admitted by the 1st respondent, the... More
Appellant was employed by the Respondent as its Managing Director. In 2018, the Auditor General was requested to carry out an audit and forensic investigation in the operations of ZESA Holdings and its subsidiary companies. The Auditor General in turn contracted PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC) to carry out the audit. The latter made a report to the Auditor General upon completion of the audit in January 2019. The audit report made certain findings and recommendations. In respect of Respondent’s books of accounts, it was stated that certain transactions had been made irregularly and it was recommended that Appellant be charged with misconduct.... More
