Applicant (“Stella Mundi”) approached the court on an urgent basis praying for a declaratur. The relief essentially seeks a stay of execution of an original order granted by this court under case number HCHC 321/24. More
Applicant applied to this Court for rescission of judgment which Respondent opposed. The application was made in terms of section 92C of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 as read with Rule 40 of the Labour Court Rules S.I. 150 of 2017. The material facts are set out hereafter. 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.
The appeal grounds of appeal were ten-fold. It is inexpedient to regurgitate word for word the lengthy grounds of appeal. However, the grounds raise four issues which will be dealt with ad seriatim. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the appeals officer dated 6 November 2023 wherein the appellant was found guilty and dismissed from employment. Appellant was employed as an Engineering Stores Clerk by the respondent and was responsible for sourcing materials required by the employer from suppliers. He was essentially the go between the respondent and the suppliers. The appellant through his position could source quotations from different suppliers and choose the most convenient. More
The appellant and the second respondent, who are both in the mining business, locked horns over a dispute concerning mining claims. The first respondent is the Provincial Mining Director for Mashonaland East. More
Applicant seeks an order declaring two agreements of sale of land between itself and first respondent invalid. It also prays for the refund of purchase price in the sum of US$220,000. The application is resisted by first and fourth respondents. The rest of the respondents elected to stay out of the broil. I will advert to the role and relevance of the respective parties as the judgment unfolds. More
