This is an opposed application in which the applicant seeks the following order:
“1. The notice of withdrawal filed by the respondent in matter number HC 1856/18 is an irregular step in litigation and is ipso facto set aside.
2. The notice of withdrawal filed by the respondent in matter number HC 1783/18 is an irregular step in litigation and is ipso facto set aside
3. The respondent shall pay costs of suit on an attorney and client scale”. More
This is a court application for a Declaratory Order and Consequential relief made in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7.06]. The application is for an order declaring that the amendments made by respondent on 18 November 2015 to Permit No. SD/381 issued by respondent on 7 April 1999 are null and void. The application also seeks that the amendments made by respondent to para 2 of the Subdivision Permit No. SD/381 regarding the status of the road on 18 November 2015 be and are hereby set aside. More
1. Applicant appeared before first respondent (“the trial magistrate”) facing a charge of incitement to commit public violence.
2. Applicant did three things-all in one breath. He pleaded not guilty to the charge, amplified this plea with a defence outline, and excepted to the charge.
3. The sum total of the complaints raised in the exception was that the charge disclosed no offence cognizable at law.
4. The exception was dismissed by the trial magistrate who ordered the matter to proceed, subject to an amendment to part of the charge.
5. The ruling prompted applicant to file the present application... More
This is an application for reinstatement of an application for condonation for late noting of an appeal which was deemed abandoned in terms of the Rules of this Court Statutory Instrument 150 of 2017 (S.I.150/17). It is opposed. More
This is an opposed court application in which the applicant seeks the suspension of the council of the 1st respondent pending a forensic audit and that during such suspension the affairs of the 1st respondent be managed by the board appointed on 22 June 2023. The 1st and 2nd respondents opposed the application and raised some preliminary points. Likewise, the applicant has also raised some preliminary points. More
The applicant was employed by the respondent as the City Architect, for the city of Harare. As part of his duties there were at least twelve projects which required his expertise, supervision and leadership. Targets were set following agreement between him and his superior .The targets were not met. This resulted in him facing disciplinary proceedings.At the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings he was dismissed from the respondent’s employ on 3 July 2019 for ‘gross incompetency or inefficiency in the performance of his work’ in violation of s4(f) of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) , Statutory Instrument 15... More
