At the onset of oral argument in this Court, Respondent raised an objection which Applicant opposed. Appellant’s appeal was signed for by D. Chiwara of the National Union For the Plastics, Pharmaceuticals, Fertilizers, Chemicals, Batteries Manufacturing and Allied Industries of Zimbabwe. However Respondent operates in the transport industry. Its employees are represented by the trade union for the transport operator’s industry. On that basis respondent objected to the representation of appellant (its employee) by the plastics and allied industries union. More
The plaintiffs are former employees of the third defendant who either retired, resigned, got retrenched or dismissed or were asked to proceed on leave until they were called back to work. The ex-employees are members of the first defendant, a pension fund in which they participated as employees of the third defendant. The plaintiffs were entitled to some pension benefits from the first defendant on termination of employment. The second defendant is a Board of Trustees, which oversees the operations of the pension fund on behalf of both the plaintiffs and the first defendant. The fourth defendant was sued as... More
Applicant applied to this Court for rescission of judgement in terms of section 92C of the Labour Act Chapter 28:01 as read with Rule of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Respondent opposed the application. More
The applicant a student at the University of Zimbabwe has approached this court on an urgent basis seeking the following relief:
Terms of the Final Order Sought
1. That the decision of the second respondent in his capacity as the Vice Chancellor of the second respondent to suspend the applicant be and is hereby declared unlawful and is accordingly set aside.
2. That the letter of suspension be and is hereby declared null and void and of no force or effect and is hereby set aside. More
The applicant has approached this court seeking to be admitted to bail pending trial in terms of s 117A of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 09:07]. He is facing a charge of rape contrary to s 65(1) as read with s 64 (1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. In terms of s 50 (1) (d) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, the applicant has a constitutional right to be admitted to bail. He should be denied bail if there are cogent reasons to show that his admission to bail will defeat the interests of... More
The applicants allege that they are owners and occupants of the stands identified above. They claim to have bought such stands from one Martin Sibindi and Pilo Kauma or from people who had bought from these two. Martin Sibindi is alleged to have been the owner of the remainder of Lot 12 Tynwald, Harare and he worked with Pilo Kauma in disposing of these. After purchasing the stands, the applicants claim to have taken occupation and developed the stands into the homes which they currently occupy. Martin Sibindi who was slow in effecting developments to the stands was allegedly sued... More
At the commencement of the hearing the applicant abandoned preliminary issues which he had raised. The respondent too raised a preliminary point. It was persisted with.
Preliminary point
[2] The preliminary issue was that the applicant approached the Court prematurely as he had not exhausted domestic remedies. The Court’s attention was drawn to a letter dated 28th June 2024 which the respondent wrote the applicant. The letter is titled “Re : NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT”. More
