This is an application for review in terms of Rules 20 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017.
The reasons for writing this judgment are the developments that took place in this matter.
The present application was filed by one Austin Ndota on 10 January 2025 and it has cited Martin Manyika as the Second Respondent. The decision of the said Martin Manyika purportedly issued on 18 December 2024 is attached to the application for Review. The application is prefaced thus:
“Please take Notice that the Applicant hereby applies for review of proceedings and the resultant determination by a Designated Agent... More
This is a Court application for a Declaratory Order in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06] and final interdict. Applicants seek an order in the following terms:
1.The suspension of Certificate of Registration Number 31283 under case number HC2242/19 be and is hereby declared to have lapsed.
2.The fourth and fifth Respondents continued mining activity after the finalization of HC1707/18 and 1824/21 within the operation of mining certificate (registration number 31283) be and is hereby declared to be unlawful.
3.Consequently, fourth and fifth respondents herein be and are hereby ordered to stop all mining operations... More
for the second respondent
KATIYO J: The applicant is seeking a declarator and consequential relief in terms of section 14 of the High Court Act in the following terms;
IT IS DECLARED THAT:
1. The applicant’s certificate of registration for two mining locations known as Good and Good Days, (registered under certificate of registration number 33908BM, and 33909BM, respectively) are valid and extant.
2. The applicant is entitled to exercise mining rights on the mining locations known as Good Days and Good Days 6 (registered under certificates of registration number 33908BM, and 33909BM, respectively) to the exclusion of the 1st... More
This is a chamber application for joinder wherein the applicant seeks to be joined as a party to the proceedings in Case No. HCH 884/24, a court application for review. The relief sought by the applicant is captured as follows:
“1. The application be and is hereby granted.
2. Applicant be and is hereby joined as 2nd respondent in HCH 884/24.
3. The Applicant be and is hereby ordered to file its opposing papers, if any, in HCH 884/24 within 5 days of the granting of this order.
4. The opposing respondents shall pay the costs of this application.” More
1.This is an opposed appeal against the decision of the respondent’s Disciplinary Authority. Seven grounds of appeal were raised as follows:
1.1 “The Disciplinary Authority erred at law in holding that the raising of an additional charge after the suspension of the employee was valid at law. More
MUNANGATI-MANONGWA: An application for substituted service is a plea to court to allow a litigant to use alternative means of serving process to another litigant in a manner other than the usual expected manner of service as per r 15 of the High Court Rules 2021. The order granted in such an application is a special order and same is not granted on mere asking. There has to be special circumstances calling for such relief. Due to the absence of averments pertaining to such special circumstances I refused to grant the application by the applicant herein and called for more... More
In an order dated 15 January 2025, this Court struck off the roll the application for condonation for late filing of an application for Review after upholding the points in limine raised by Second Respondent. Despite reasons having been given in an Ex Tempore Judgment on the same date, Applicant has requested for ‘fuller’ reasons More
