This is a purported application for condonation for late noting an application for review. It is opposed. I say “purported” for the following reason.
This Court in Judgment Number LC/H/144/22 handed down on 3rd June 2022 determined a matter between the parties. The applicant has not appealed that judgment to the Supreme
Court. Instead he has approached this Court for “review”. The application is opposed with counsel for the respondent arguing that not only does the Court lack jurisdiction to review its own judgment, but the application is frivolous and vexatious. More
In an appeal to this court the respondent raised points in limine mainly to the effect that the appeal before the court was improperly before it. This is so taking into account the fact that the appellant changed the appeal grounds that she used when she lodged her application for condonation of late filing of appeal. Rule 22(2) Labour Court rules makes it clear that the condonation application shall have the draft notice attached to it. The essence in so attaching the draft is for the court to be able to glean whether or not it is a merited appeal... More
This application was placed before the court as an urgent court application in terms of the proviso to r 59(6), as read with r 65(8) of the High Court Rules, 2021. The timelines within which further pleadings were to be filed were truncated in terms of the proviso to r 59(6). More
On 6 March, 2008 Khaled Kassim Joosab (“Joosab”), the first respondent herein, leased his property, Number 4, 19 Robert Mugabe Street, Rusape (“the property”) to the applicant, one Gladys Svosve (“Gladys”). The lease which Joosab and Gladys signed was to endure for one full year. Gladys was to pay a monthly rental of ZWL$2 200 000 000 for her occupation and use of the property. More
This is an appeal against conviction and sentence. The appellant was convicted of one count of “possession of a firearm without a licence” in contravention of s 4(1) of the Firearms Act [Chapter 10:09] and unlawful possession of explosives in contravention of s 3(1) and (2) of the Explosives Act [Chapter 10:08]. He was sentenced as follows: Count 1: 36 months imprisonment of which 15 months imprisonment is suspended for 5 years on condition accused does not within that period commit any defence involving the possession of a firearm without a valid certificate for which he is sentenced to imprisonment... More
The application for condonation was filed on 4 September 2020. The application was opposed by the Respondent. In his founding affidavit Appellant averred that he was a former employee of the Respondent. He was employed as a Research and Development Technician. He had been dismissed from employment on 29th of November, 2019 following a disciplinary process where he was facing charges of theft, embezzlement and misuse of company property. A Disciplinary Committee set up to hear the matter had found him guilty of all the charges levelled. An internal appeal was equally unsuccessful. He had then appealed to the National... More
: The parties customarily married in 1998 and solemnised their marriage officially on 30 June 2005. They lived together till 2018. They had three children one of whom is still a minor having been born on 7 October 2005. The issues agreed upon are that the marriage has irretrievably broken down. The plaintiff also agrees that he ought to pay maintenance for the child but disputes the quantum. The parties also have no issue regarding the defendant having custody of the minor child. More
