Applicant applied for condonation of a belated application for leave to appeal this Court’s judgment referenced LCH 84/23 to the Supreme Court. Respondent opposed the application.
At the onset of oral argument the Court pressed applicant to cite the legal basis for the application. This was in light of the fact that the Court has previously in a different matter ruled that there is no legal basis for such an application in the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Applicant’s response was to apply for directions under Rule 32 on the basis that there is a lacuna in the Rules. More
Applicant applied for condonation of a belated application for leave to appeal this Court’s judgment referenced LCH 84/23 to the Supreme Court. Respondent opposed the application.
At the onset of oral argument the Court pressed applicant to cite the legal basis for the application. This was in light of the fact that the Court has previously in a different matter ruled that there is no legal basis for such an application in the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Applicant’s response was to apply for directions under Rule 32 on the basis that there is a lacuna in the Rules. 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
The applicants filed an application for a declaratory order and consequential relief in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06]. They seek relief in the following terms:
“1. That the Global Compensation Deed by the Government of Zimbabwe as represented by the 1st and 2nd Respondent on one part, and representatives of the former white race farmers of the other part, to pay only former white farmers for improvements on lawfully compulsorily acquired land be and is hereby declared discriminatory on the grounds of race and constitutes unfair, cruel and degrading treatment of the black indigenous... 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
The application was placed before me as an application for quantification. The application is ‘purportedly’ made in terms of Section 89(1)a of the Labour Act as read with Rule 14 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. There is a dispute between the parties as to the accuracy of the provision cited by Applicant. The issue will be determined below. Sufficient to note at this stage that the application is opposed by the Respondent. More
This is an appeal against the arbitrator’s decision in a labor dispute between the appellant employer and the respondent employee.
The background facts of the matter are that the employer employed the employee as a teacher on a contract with a probation period. Upon expiration of the probation period the employer issued a notice to the employee that it was not extending her contract. Aggrieved by the non-extension of her contract the employee took the matter up with the result that the arbitrator gave a determination in her favour. This prompted the employer to appeal against the arbitrator’s decision. More