This is an application for review of completed proceedings from Inyathi Magistrates Court in terms of section 27(1)(c) of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06] (“the Rules”). The applicants were arraigned before the Magistrate Court facing a charge of contravening section 368 of the Mines and Minerals Act [Chapter 21:05.] (“the Mines and Minerals Act”). The allegations were that on 4 January 2025 and along Bulawayo-Nkayi road near Ndwangwana shopping centre, Queens, Inyathi the applicants unlawfully prospected for gold without a permit or licence. More
This is an urgent chamber application for stay of execution of the order of this court granted in HCH 2637/20. The stay of execution is being sought in the interim pending the return date. On the return date execution is sought to be stayed pending determination of the More
This is an application for a mandatory interdict. Applicant seeks an order in the following terms:
1. The application for compelling Order be and is hereby granted.
2.The Respondents be and are hereby ordered to release the Deawoo Excavator at Number 32 Courtney, Ballantyne Park, Borrowdale.
3. The Respondents are prohibited from denying Applicant access to Courtney, Ballantyne Park, Borrowdale Number 32 for purposes of collection of the Deawoo Excavator.
4. The Respondents to pay costs on higher scale. More
[1] What is in a name? Is it true that that which we call a rose, by any other name would smell just as sweet? Not quite, if you consider the circumstances of this case. Apparently, there is everything in a name.
[2] On 12 March 2025, the first respondent obtained an order from this court, under case number HCH685/25, placing a company called Sinosteel Zimasco (Private) Limited (‘Sinosteel Zimasco’) under corporate rescue proceedings. The terms of the order were that: More
The employer and the employees in this case approached the Labour Court on appeal and on cross appeal in respect of an arbitral decision which had ruled that they appear before the retrenchment board so that the board could assist them to arrive at a mutually agreeable and mutually beneficial package. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) sitting at Harare dated 15 March 2023 wherein the court a quo granted the respondent`s claim against the appellant in the sum of US $10 718 373.51 plus interest thereon at the rate of 2% per month calculated from the date of judgment up to the date of full payment. The court a quo also ordered that the appellant pays costs on the attorney and client scale. More
he first respondent, is a statutory institution constituted in terms of the Manpower Planning and Development Act [Chapter 28:02], which contracted the appellant in November 2000 to construct a nine-storey building in Harare and subsequently took occupation of the completed building as its headquarters. It has in fact litigated in that name, almost at an industrial scale in the courts, but suddenly came across an idea, namely that it does not have legal personality to contract or to sue and be sued in its own right. Never mind that the discovery of its legal incapacity did not stop it litigating... More
