On 14 January 2025 this court handed down an order by consent where the parties hoped to settle their matter out of court. The out of court settlement failed, resulting in the matter being re-enrolled for 24 January 2025. On 24 January 2025 the matter which was an appeal at the instance of the employer was heard leading to this judgement. A point in limine vis the propriety of the appeal was raised but failed due to lack of foundation. The point therefore does not form part of this judgement. More
On 13 February 2025 this court handed down an order granting the review application with costs on the ordinary scale. It ordered further that the proceedings leading to the applicant’s dismissal be set aside and in their place the matter be determined afresh before a different hearing officer. More
Applicant applied to this Court for the reinstatement of his appeal (LC/H/984/24) which was deemed as abandoned and dismissed. The application was made in terms of Rule 46 of the Labour Court rules, 2017. Respondent opposed the application. More
This case is an urgent chamber application wherein the applicant seeks an interdict against the respondent enjoining it from taking possession of the machinery located at applicant’s premises at No. 65 VA Great Riversdale Farm Ward 22, Mazowe. The relief is sought to ensure the preservation of the subject machinery as security for the determination and recovery of applicant’s legal entitlements, including compensation for the respondent’s breach of the agreement between the parties. More
(1) This is a court application for a declaratory order brought in terms of s14 of the High Court Act, Chapter [7:06]. The relief sought is couched in the following terms;
“1. It is hereby declared that the applicant has paid the 1st respondent full purchase price for an undivided share of 0.39% of Coyant Investments (Private) Limited, translating to 0,39% of Stand 12923 in Madokero Estate coupled with an exclusive right of occupation of Flat 37C on the immovable property. More
This matter is a civil action wherein the parties drew up a statement of agreed facts at the Pre-Trial Conference stage such that it became a stated case. All the facts are therefore common cause. It is the applicable law that is contentious. The brief background of the case is that sometime in 2014, plaintiff, which is a company incorporated in Germany, sold seven buses to the defendant which is a local company and such buses were delivered to the defendant as agreed. The purchase price for each bus was agreed at US$84 143, 28. It is agreed that the... More
The applicant is a company duly incorporated in terms of the Companies and Other Businesses Act [Chapter 24:31]. The first respondent is an administrative authority responsible for the collection of taxes and is established in terms of the Revenue Authority Act [Chapter 23:11] (“the Revenue Authority Act”). The applicant was placed under corporate rescue in terms of the Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07] and as a consequence, its affairs fall entirely under the administration of a Corporate Rescue Practitioner (CRP). More
