Compliance with court orders by some government officials acting in their official capacity is often problematic. This is despite the constitutional provision that obligates all citizens and state entities to observe the rule of law. This case is a clear example of reluctance to comply with a court order. This application is premised on the allegations that the first respondent defied an extant order of this court necessitating filing of the application for contempt of court in terms of r79 (1) of the High Court Rules, 2021. More
This matter came before me as a Chamber Application by the Applicant seeking leave to file a Supplementary Affidavit in interpleader proceedings currently pending under Case No. HCH 53/25. The application was opposed by the third Respondent More
The applicant approached this court seeking temporary relief for stay of execution of an order granted by this court per CHINAMORA J pending the confirmation or discharge of the provisional order that it seeks before me. On the return date, the applicant also seeks by way of substantive relief, that the execution of the CHINAMORA J order be suspended pending the determination of an application for leave for direct access that was made to the Constitutional Court. More
Up until recently the applicant was a member of the Zimbabwe Prisons and Correctional Services (ZPCS). He was discharged by the Commissioner General of Prisons and Correctional Services, (the second respondent) following disciplinary proceedings conducted under the Prisons (Staff) (Discipline) Regulations, 1984 (‘the regulations”). He now brings this application in terms of ss 26 & 27 of the High Court, [Chapter 7:06] for a review of that decision. He seeks to have it set aside on the basis that according to him the procedure leading to his discharge was marred by several procedural irregularities. More
This judgment disposes of case numbers HCH 5885/24 and HCH 13/25. The applicant and the respondents are common in the two cases. The applicant is Walter Magaya who described himself in both cases as a “renowned Minister of the Gospel and a passionate football enthusiast” who has “proudly supported local football serving as a dedicated benefactor to the support.” This was rightfully not disputed because the applicants CV is pregnant with proof of financial and logistic support which he has given to the game. The first respondent is Lincolin Mutasa cited in his official capacity as the chairperson of the... More
This is an application for a declaratur wherein the specific relief is;
“1. That a declaratory order be and is hereby granted that a claim for entitlement to enjoyment and protection against a continued infringement of a fundamental right does not prescribe, hence the applicant association’s qualifying membership do remain each entitled, respectively, to full payment of any arrear monthly s 3 and 4(1) of the WAR VETERANS (Pension Scheme) Regs, SI 280/97, being the war veterans suitable welfare pension, accasioned them over the years, as guaranteed for under s 84(1)(a) of the Constitution and saved under s 27(4), (5),... More
