The proceedings in this matter were first placed before me on review in July, 2020 whereupon I gave a direction that the record be transcribed as I could not make out the magistrates handwriting, much as I tried to. It took nearly 5 months for the transcribed record to be forwarded back to the Registrar. The accused had already served the sentence imposed on him. This is one of the unsatisfactory consequences of the late compliance with the transcription directions. In regard to ineligible handwritings, we are all gifted differently in the art of handwriting. What is important is to... More
1.This is an appeal against the appellant’s dismissal from the respondent’s employ.
2. The appellant was employed by the respondent company as its Deputy General Manager. He
was answerable to the General Manager. The pertinent portion of the contract of employment
(P 40) between him and the respondent with respect to his duties provides as follows;
“1. Duties and Responsibilities.
Reporting to the General Manager you will be responsible for the general supervision and management services, plant operation and maintenance. Substantive responsibilities will encompass the following:
(i) – xvii
xviii Any other duties and responsibilities that may be allocated to... More
This is an appeal of a judgment of the Magistrate sitting at Zaka. The order granted by the Magistrate reads as follows:-
“It is ordered as follows:-
1. Respondent be and is hereby ordered to keep and observe peace towards applicant.
2. Respondent and all other persons acting through him or on his instructions are interdicted from remaining on Govo land for the purpose of threatening or interfering with the normal business and farming operations of applicant, his people, his heirs executors, administrators, successions or assigns
3. Respondent and all other persons acting through him and on his instructions be... More
The applicant is employed by the respondent as a revenue officer. The dispute between the parties relates to the alleged non-payment of the applicant’s salary by the respondent. The basic facts of the dispute are common cause. The respondent as part of its staff development has a policy wherein employees are permitted to improve themselves academically or otherwise. To that end they may take study leave on conditions which are laid out in a document called “ZMIRA Staff Training and Development Policy”. The policy document provides for study leave of a maximum thirteen days in a calendar year. This type... More
The Plaintiffs who are husband and wife issued summons on 25 March 2014 against the first defendant claiming for an order that the first defendant and all those claiming occupation through him be evicted from Lot 11 of Danbury Park Estate within 48 hours of service of the order upon him. That the first defendant pays costs of suit. By order of this Honourable Court in HC 3127/18 dated 19 November 2018 the second defendant was joined as the 2nd Defendant and the summons were amended accordingly. More
The applicants were electrical powere ngineering students at the Masvingo Polytechnic College (hereinafter called the College). The 1st respondent is the Principal of the said College. The second respondent is the Masvingo HEXCO Regional Chairperson for HEXCO Board. 1strespondent is cited as the responsible authority for student affairs of the College. 2nd respondent manages the examinations of first respondent. More
