This matter was struck off the roll on 17 October 2023. Appellant’s legal practitioners have requested for reasons therefore. This Court makes the observation that these reasons were only requested after an application for reinstatement of this matter was also struck off the roll on 21 March 2024 as being improperly before the Court. However, the following are the reasons as requested by the Appellant’s legal practitioners. More
This is a chamber application for condonation of non-compliance with the rules and extension of time within which to apply for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court made in terms of r 64 as read with r 43 (3) and r 60 (2) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018 (“the Rules”). More
Please take note that the final order on the last page being page 13 of the judgment handed down on the 26th of June, 2024 under reference LC/H/279/24 carries the following omissions;
i. For the purpose of clarity, point number (v) shall be inserted into the judgement as the final point in the order and it is to read;
“(v) The decision by the Disciplinary Authority be and is hereby upheld
in its entirety.” More
This is an application for condonation for the late filing of an application for review. Should this application succeed, the application intends to seek a review of the decision of the 1st respondent rendered on the 1st of September 2022. In that decision 1st respondent declined to entertain the dispute between the applicant and the 2nd respondent on the basis that a determination over the same dispute had already been rendered in March 2014 (which case was captioned as Dispute/Falcon Gold 1 D Stoddart/2014) hence there was no need to re-open it. More
The applicant has now approached the Court with an application for condonation of the departure from the Rules in terms of rule 5(1) (a) of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016 (“the Rules”). In addition, the applicant seeks authorization of the issuance of a certificate of service in respect of the service of the application under CCZ 3/24 upon the Attorney General, that the Registrar rejected. More
On 30 November 2018, Plaintiff and 1st Defendant entered into a verbal agreement. Under that agreement, Plaintiff paid an amount of US$87,000.00 in return for the delivery of a motor vehicle, a Toyota Land Cruiser Prado VX Chassis Number JJEBH3FJ4OK20718. [the motor vehicle]. The motor vehicle described above was imported into Zimbabwe from South Africa by the 1st Defendant. In or around June 2021, the aforesaid motor vehicle was seized from Plaintiff by the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority [ZIMRA] on the basis that its importation into Zimbabwe had been done fraudulently. The Defendants were duly notified of that development. Despite making... More
The matter was originally placed before the Court as an application for condonation for late filing of an application for confirmation of an order by a Labour Officer. The matter was opposed at the hearing, the 2nd respondent raised a preliminary point arguing that the applicant’s representative had no authority to represent the applicant on account of the failure to file proof to that effect. More
