Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by year
This is an urgent chamber application for a provisional order interdicting the first respondent from performing his duties as Corporate Rescue Manager for the third respondent and for him not to interfere with the business operations of the third respondent. While the interim interdict herein is being sought pending the return date, the confirmation of the provisional order is being sought pending determination of an application instituted by the applicant under case no. HCH 587/24. In HCH587/24 the applicant herein is seeking the setting aside of the first respondent’s appointment and his removal as Corporate Rescue Manager of the third... More

On 21 May 2021, the first respondent filed an application for a declaration in this court. This application was served on applicant’s legal practitioners on the same day. The legal practitioners failed to reach the applicants due to network problems. Applicants who were not aware of this development did not make any personal efforts to communicate with their legal practitioners as they believed there was no urgency to do so since there were no outstanding matters after the first respondent had withdrawn a matter she had filed against applicants under HC 6404/20. More

This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Labour Court (“the court a quo”), dated 10 June 2022. The judgment was passed in respect of two consolidated appeals that were filed before it. In that judgment the court a quo upheld the respondent’s appeal against dismissal from employment and ordered his reinstatement or alternatively, the payment of damages in the event that reinstatement was no longer possible. More

In September, 2016 the applicant purchased the mining business from Old Nic Mine. It undertook to employ the mine’s former workers. Its undertaking was premised on the condition that the workers would not claim from it any money which was due to them from Old Nic Mine for the period that they were on unpaid leave. A majority of the mine’s former workers agreed to the condition. They were therefore re-engaged and their contracts of employment taken over and carried forward by the applicant. The respondents did not agree to the condition which the applicant proposed to others and them.... More

This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Magistrate’s Court in which the court a quo granted an application in favour of the 1st respondent (Mavetera) for the rectification of the register in terms of section 162 of the Companies and Other Business Entities Act (the Act) [Chapter 24:31]. More

The respondent in this matter raised preliminary points which were partly successful. It sought to appeal to the Supreme Court but that Court declined jurisdiction at that stage preferring to have the matter referred back to this Court. More

The matter was placed before me as an application for condonation for late filing of an appeal against the determination of the Designated Agent of the National Employment Council for the Mining Industry which determination was handed down on the 18th of May 2023. The application is filed in terms of Rule 22(1) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. It is opposed. More