Deceased died in 2021 and his estate was declared intestate and first respondent was appointed executor. While processes were underway a soldier’s will was thrown into the fray. The will disentitled everyone else except the second to the fifth respondents. First respondent finalised a new interim administration and distribution account based on the soldiers will. The application seeks a declaration for second applicant to inherit from the deceased’s estate. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) sitting at Harare handed down on 31 January 2023 wherein the court
a quo dismissed the appellant`s claim that certain loans advanced to the first respondent be repaid in United States dollars. More
The first and second applicants share certain things in common. They seek the same relief against the first and second respondents. They were both shot at and injured by members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police on 22 February 2018. They both instituted claims for general and special damages before this court under HC 11467/18 and HC 11469/18 respectively. In their defence, the respondents herein raised the defence of prescription as part of their plea to the plaintiffs’ claims. More
The Respondent through his Notice of Response and Heads of Argument has taken four points in limine. The points are as follows;
(1) That the Notice of Appeal as filed is fatally defective for non-compliance with the provisions of Rule 19 (1) of the Labour Court rules, 2017. More particularly that the appeal was filed outside of the twenty-one (21) days of receipt of determination as outlined in Rule 19 (1).
(2) That the relief being sought in the Notice of appeal is incompetent at law in that Appellant is seeking reinstatement only without an alternative claim for damages in... More
Applicant applied to this Court for condonation of late noting of appeal. The application was made in terms of Rule 22 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Respondent opposed the application. Previously applicant noted an appeal under reference LCH 559/23. The appeal was struck off the roll by this Court (Justice Chivizhe) on 23rd April 2024 by reason of a fatally defective Notice of Appeal. Applicant then filed the present application on 23 May 2024 More
This is an appeal against the dismissal of Appellant from Respondent’s employ. There are eight(8) grounds of appeal . Out of those 8 grounds the parties agreed that with respect to the first four grounds they will abide by papers filed of record and oral argument will be restricted to grounds 5to7.As usual following the grounds is the prayer. The prayer reads:
‘WHEREFORE the Applicant prays for an Order for the setting aside of the Disciplinary Authority’s decision.’ More
The notice of application for review sets out three (3) grounds for review being bias, irrationality and predetermined outcome. In the course of oral argument respondent abandoned its objection to the 3rd ground (predetermined outcome). As for the 2nd ground (irrationally) it is just 6 lines which essentially say the decision impugned was based on applicant’s absence from the hearing without considering the reasons for the absence. This Court considers it as a cognisable ground for review. Apparently, respondent’s real beef is about the 1st ground (bias). The ground was broken down into 9 paragraphs. These cover a range of... More
