Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by year
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal is provided for by the Public Service Regulations S.I. 01/2000 in its section 51 (1) a&b. Respondent opposed the appeal. The grounds of appeal were nine-fold. However some of the grounds raise reviewable issues which cannot be dealt with in this appeal. The remaining grounds of appeal basically challenge the main finding by the disciplinary authority that appellant committed the act of misconduct as charged. The charge laid by the respondent’s letter dated 20th May 2020 was “ Improper and Incompetent performance of duties.” More

This is an application for review in which the applicant is challenging the ruling of the first respondent which dismissed his exception to the criminal charges that he is facing for contravening s 184(1)(c) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act (the Code). The ruling was handed down on 21 November 2022. The applicant claims that the ruling was only made available to him on 12 December 2022. More

On 13 May 2016, the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant, claiming the following: “a) Payment in the total sum of ($30 286 747.86) Thirty Million Two Hundred and Eighty Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty Seven United States Dollars and Eighty Six Cents. b) Interest on the above amount from 15 February 2016 being date of demand to date of full payment. c) Costs of suit. Being payment for architectural services rendered by Plaintiff to defendant at Defendant’s specific request and instance during the period extending from (sic) to 2013 in Victoria Falls, which amount despite demand remains due... More

It is common cause that there is a business relationship between applicant and 2nd respondent. Applicant and 1st respondent have a contract for the supply of coal to applicant. On the other hand applicant has a similar contract with 2nd respondent. First respondent has a contract with 2nd respondent for the mining of coal destined for the foreign market. There is a clause in this contract which bars the 2nd respondent from unconditionally selling coal to the applicant. More

This is a bail application lodged by the applicant after his first application was refused by this court. The first application was refused on the 3 November 2022. The applicant, who is jointly charged with other persons, now seeks bail based on changed circumstances. The applicant and his co-accused are charged with one count of robbery as defined in section 126 (b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] (“the Criminal Code)”. More

The applicant and the respondent were candidates in the Chinhoyi Municipality ward 4 elections held on the 23rd of August 2023. The respondent was declared the duly elected Councillor for the ward on the following day, the 24th. More

This is a court application for revival of a court order in Case number HC 8256/16. The court order was granted on 28 December 2016 in favour of the Applicant against both first and second Respondents as surety and guarantor respectively, wherein the respondents were ordered to pay a sum of US$ 773 904.52 plus interest on the said capital sum of US$651 332.00 at the agreed rate of 7% per annum. Both respondents made arrangements to settle the debt owed to the Applicant through a Non-Resident Transitional Account held by CBZ Bank Limited for onward transmission to Applicant’s foreign... More