At the commencement of the proceedings, the Court enquired from Applicant’s legal practitioners whether the matter was properly before the Court seeing that that it purported to be a ‘Composite Application’ for condonation and review. The Court also enquired whether the Rules provided for such a procedure. More
This is an opposed chamber application in which the applicant seeks to register an arbitral award dated 14 June 2023 as an order of this Court in terms of Article 35 of the Model Law (First Schedule to the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15]. The award was made in favor of the applicant (claimant in the arbitration) against the two respondents. After this application was filed, the respondents instituted a separate application in this Court (under case HC 5436/23) to set aside the same award. The set-aside application is premised on several grounds, chief among them that the award is contrary... More
1. This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) dated 29 February, 2024 dismissing the appellant’s urgent court application in which it sought declaratory and consequential relief. More
Applicants applied to this Court for joinder in terms of Rule 33(2) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. At that onset of oral argument respondent raised a point in limine which applicants opposed. More
Applicants applied to this Court for their joinder to the appeal pending under reference LCH 74/23. The application was made in terms of Rule 33(2) of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Respondent opposed the application. More
The application is for quantification of damages in lieu of reinstatement. The application is filed pursuant to a court order granted by this court on 10th November, 2023 with a corrigendum issued on the 4 April 2024. The application is opposed by the 2nd Respondent More
[1]This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court sitting at Bulawayo (“the court a quo”) handed down as judgment number HB 188/24 wherein, after striking out all but one of the appellant’s several grounds of appeal against both conviction and sentence on the basis that they were invalid, it allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the sentence of 15 years imposed against the appellant and substituted it with one of an effective 12-years imprisonment. More
