At the onset of oral argument in this Court respondent raised a point in limine which appellant opposed. The point was that appellant filed 2 documents which were not part of the proceedings in the tribunals a quo. It is expatiated in respondent’s heads of argument as follows:
“10. The first document purportedly signed on the 23rd of November 2019 seeks to suggest that cash deposits of RTGS $400 and RTGS $1 700 had been authorised by Susan Togarepi, also known as Susan Nyaradzo Mushaike, whilst the second document purportedly signed on the 25th of November 2019 seeks to suggest... More
Appellant appealed to this Court against his dismissal from employment by Respondent. The appeal was made in terms of Section 92D of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01. Respondent opposed the appeal. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Chief Executive Officer finding appellant guilty and dismissing her from work on allegations of misconduct at the work place. Brief facts of the matter are that appellant who was in the respondent’s employment was charged with misconduct emanating from the facts that she had acted negligently and caused loss of the employer’s ticket book. She was found guilty of the infraction. She appealed to the Chief Executive Officer without success hence the instant appeal. More
In this Urgent Chamber Application the applicant sought the following order,
“1. The Respondent and all persons claiming occupation, rights, tittle and interests through him shall remove or cause the removal of themselves and all such persons occupying the portion of Plot 13 of Sale Camp Farm purportedly identified as Stand 13 B of Sale Camp Farm.
2. Failing such removal the Sheriff of High Court be and is hereby authorised and directed to evict the Respondent and all persons claiming occupation, right; title and interests through him.
3. The Respondent and all persons claiming occupation right, tittle and interests... More
The applicant approached this court seeking registration of a Designated Agent ruling in terms of s 128 (1) of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01] for enforcement purposes. More
The applicant, an ex-constable in the Zimbabwe Republic Police appeared before a single officer on 18 December 2015 facing a charge of contravening paragraph 34 of the Schedule to the Police Act [Chapter 11:10] i.e., “Omitting or neglecting to perform any duty or performing any duty in an improper manner.” He was convicted and sentenced to a term of imprisonment. The applicant appealed the conviction and sentence to the Commissioner General of Police, and the appeal was dismissed in its entirety. Subsequent to the dismissal of the appeal, a Board of Inquiry was convened to inquire into his suitability to... More
This is a composite court application for condonation for the late filing of an application for rescission of default judgment and the rescission of default judgment in terms of rule 29(1) of the High Court Rules, 2021. The default judgment was handed down by this court on 18 July 2022. In that judgment, the court ordered the applicant (who was the second respondent therein) to deliver to the first respondent (the applicant therein) the outstanding 1, 020, 26 cubic metres of granite blocks, alternatively, pay the sum of US$446 322.31 being the total value of the 1, 020, 26 cubic... More
