This matter involves two appeals; a main appeal noted by the appellants and a cross-appeal noted by the second respondent. Each appeal is against a part of the judgment of the High Court (“the court a quo”) handed down on 12 June 2024 as judgment number HH 240/24 in case number HC 6656/23 in an interpleader application filed by the first respondent in terms of r 63 (2) as read with r 63 (5) and (7) of the High Court Rules, 2021. The part appealed against in the main appeal are paras 1 to 5 of the judgment whilst the... More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Designated Authority (DA Mutezo) who upheld the guilty verdict and dismissal penalty meted out on appellant employee following allegations of gross incompetency or inefficiency in the performance of his duties in contravention of the respondent code of conduct. More
[1] This is an application for reinstatement of a matter. An order was made striking off the application.
The following are the reasons.
[2] At the commencement of the hearing an application for postponement of the matter was made on behalf of the applicant. This, it was argued, was necessitated by the absence due to illness of the officer who ordinarily deals with the matter. More
On 6 November 2024 we delivered a brief ex-tempore judgement upholding, for the most part, an appeal against the decision of the magistrate Court sitting at Masvingo (the court a quo). The court a quo had granted what was essentially an order for specific performance (other related matters) against the appellants; this followed the collapse of a contractual relationship between the parties. We now provide detailed reasons informing our decision at the behest of the respondent who has made a formal request for the same.
In a word, what was intended to be a straight forward agreement for the hire... More
[1] Admire Makuvadze (first appellant), Delight Choga (second appellant) and one Joseph Phiri (Joseph) were arrested and subsequently charged with robbery as defined in section 126 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] (the CODE). They appeared before the court of a Regional Magistrate at Gwanda. The allegations were that on 12 February 2012, at New Eclipse Mine, Shangani, the two appellants and their accomplices used violence against the complainant and took 100 kilograms of gold carbons belonging to the complainant. They were both convicted after a contested trial. Each of them was sentenced to 10 years... More
This is a review application against a magistrate’s decision refusing to release seized money (US$56,000 and US$22,000) to the applicants respectively after criminal proceedings against them were halted. The applicants were charged with theft, allegedly stealing cash belonging to a company and their trial commenced. Several witnesses testified, but the State failed to locate a key witness. Consequently, on the applicants’ motion, the magistrate refused further remand and removed the applicants from remand effectively ending the proceedings. The applicants then applied under section 58 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07] (“CP&EA”) for return of the seized money.... More
