This is an application for review. The applicant seeks an order that his suspension be set aside; that he should not be punished by either a reduction of rank or salary without being given an opportunity to be heard; and that if there are allegations against him a hearing de novo must be instituted. The application is opposed. More
This is a trial in which the plaintiff seeks specific performance of a contract of sale of a piece of immovable property. Essentially, she asks this court for an order compelling the first defendant to accept the balance of the purchase price, and to cede to her his title and rights in respect of Plot No. 44 Sabonabona Subdivision C, Kadoma (hereinafter called “Plot 44”). The genesis of this dispute is set out in the pleadings filed of record. Let me summarize the essential details. The plaintiff avers that, on 12 October 2018, she entered into an agreement of sale... More
Applicant is the testamentary executor of the estate late Vassilliki Divaris. The late Divaris owned 454,890 shares in respondent bank (“Tetrad”). On 28 June 2023, Tetrad published a notice of an extraordinary general meeting (“EGM”). The EGM was scheduled to take place on 20 July 2023. Its purpose being to procure shareholder approval to change the nature of the company`s business. Tetrad`s directors had resolved to surrender the bank`s licence and set sights on venturing into property and real estate. More
The plaintiff issued summons against the defendant, claiming the following relief:
a) “payment in the sum of US42 000.00 or its lawful Zimbabwean dollar equivalent.
b) Interest thereon at 10% per month calculated from the date of Summons to date of full payment.
c) Collection commission calculated in terms of the Law Society By Laws.
d) An order that the rights held by Defendant in certain immovable property being Stand 22871 Ruwa Township of subdivision of Sebastol held under Deed of Transfer No 4138/20 be declared executable.
e) Costs of suit on an attorney –client scale.” More
This matter was set down for hearing on the opposed roll on 8 June 2022. On that date, respondent had not served applicant with her heads of argument which were said to have been filed on the 25th of January 2022. Applicant therefore raised a preliminary point to the effect that respondent is barred for non-compliance with r59 (20) of SI 202/2021 for failure to serve her heads of argument immediately after filing of the aforesaid heads of argument. More
The appellant brings an appeal against the whole judgment of the Labour Court (the court a quo), which upheld the Appeal Officer’s decision confirming the Hearing Officer’s determination dismissing the appellant from employment. More
This matter was placed before this court in terms of Order 32 r 5 (5) of the Magistrates Court (Civil) Rules, 2019 (the Rules). It is a spin-off from a matter that was determined by the court a quo, in which the applicant herein was the defendant and the first respondent herein was plaintiff. The matter concerned some claims that were made by the first respondent against the applicant in the court a quo, in connection with a lease agreement that subsisted between the parties. The court found in favour of the first respondent and ordered the applicant to pay... More
