This is a court application for a declaratory relief declaring that members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police are acting unlawfully by spiking public and private motor vehicles in urban areas, particularly in Harare, are acting unlawfully by smashing the windscreens of public and private motor vehicles alleged to be infringing the law and are acting unlawfully by applying excessive force in dealing with alleged road traffic infractions in urban areas, particularly in Harare central business district. The Applicants are seeking an interdict prohibiting members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police employed by the second Respondent and working under the command of... More
HC 9129/19 and HC 6/20 were filed as separate cases. They deal with substantially the same dominant parties and the issue of an immovable property. It was because of the stated matter that the two cases were consolidated with a view to having them heard together. The consolidation was at the instance of the applicant with the consent of the respondents. More
The parties squabble over copyright. The plaintiff pursued only the claims against the first defendant, the Harare Institute of Technology, [HIT], a tertiary institution established in terms of Zimbabwean law and the second defendant, a chemical engineering lecturer at HIT, (the defendants). The plaintiff a graduate and former student of HIT obtained a chemical and process systems engineering degree in 2015 form HIT. In fulfilment of the degree, she submitted a project titled, “Design of a Plant Producing 24TPD Fuel Briquettes from Cornstover”, and [the project]. The second and third defendant also a lecturer, supervised her project. More
The appellant was convicted, on his own guilty plea of contravening s 89 (1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. He was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment of which 3 years were suspended on condition of future good behaviour. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence he appealed against both. More
Applicant applied to this Court for the review of her retrenchment by 1st Respondent. The gist of her case is set out in the Founding Affidavit as follows
“7. 1st Respondent unlawful referred her proposed retrenchment to 2nd Respondent whereas the Labour Court provides that the proposed package was supposed to be referred to, the National Employment for Electronics Communications and Allied Industry which is the Employment Council for 1st Respondent
8. 2nd Respondent failed to realise that it had no jurisdiction to confirm the proposed retrenchment package because 1st Respondent had a functional National Employment Council.
11. The 2nd... More
BHUNU JA: This is an appeal against the wholejudgment of the Labour Court(the court a quo). The order appealed against is dated 14 November 2018. That orderupheld the respondent’s objectionin limine to the effect that the appellant’s claim had prescribed. Consequently it dismissed the appellant’s application for condonation of late noting of appeal and extension of time within which to note the appeal.Aggrieved by the judgmenta quo,the appellant approached this Court on appeal for relief. More
Siansimba is a campsite in the Zambezi Valley. It is owned by the second respondent. The second respondent is a statutory body set up in terms of the Parks and Wildlife Act (Chapter 20:14). It has multiple functions. They include, inter alia, the power or obligation to control, manage and maintain national parks, botanical gardens, sanctuaries, and recreational parks for the purposes specified in that Act. In this application, the applicant seeks a number of interim interdicts against the respondents. Against the first respondent, a private company duly incorporated in accordance with the laws of this country, the applicant seeks... More
