The Applicant, an employee of the Respondent, PetroZim Line (Pvt) Ltd, was dismissed from employment following a disciplinary hearing on June 21, 2022. The Applicant successfully challenged the process leading to his dismissal in a review application under case reference LC/H/534/22. This court effectively set aside the initial disciplinary proceedings on grounds of procedural irregularities. The Respondent was directed to convene a hearing denovo within 60 days of the court order, pending which the Applicant was to revert to suspension with salary and benefits. On July 4, 2024, the Respondent issued a notice of a fresh disciplinary hearing scheduled for... More
This matter originates from an eviction order granted by the Magistrates’ Court in Case No. KKGL668/20 concerning Stand No. 14, Charles Street, Newton, Kwekwe. The order directed the eviction of the second respondent, Shepherd Tundiya, and all those claiming occupation through him. This order was confirmed by the High Court and subsequently by the Supreme Court under Case No. SCB72/23, rendering it final and binding More
On 12 March 2025 Plaintiff issued our summons claiming damages for loss of contumelia and consortium. She also claimed interest thereon and costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale. In her declaration she stated that the defendant intruded into the marriage institution between herself and her husband sometime in 2014 and proceeded to engage in a sexual relationship with the Plaintiff’s husband. This, Plaintiff claimed was despite Defendant’s knowledge of the romantic and peaceful marriage relationship existing between the plaintiff and her husband. She further stated that three children were born by the Defendant having been sired... More
KABASA J: The plaintiffs issued summons against the defendant claiming US$500 000 in damages for defamation. This amount was apportioned at US$125 000 for each of the four plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs’ claim arises from a statement the defendant uttered at the plaintiffs’ sister’s funeral. The statement is not disputed but the defendant contends that the statement was made in her capacity as a family friend “sahwira”, the content of which was truthful, fair and meant to counsel the plaintiffs. Such statement was neither wrongful nor defamatory. More
The relevant facts are as follows; - first applicant (“Savechem”) and first respondent (“Masimba”) are entities registered per the laws of Zimbabwe. Their further particulars or characteristics as commercial entities were not furnished. The parties concluded a lease agreement sometime in May 2019.
[3] In terms thereof, Savechem occupied Masimba`s premises known as 56A Main Street, Bindura. Second respondent, Mr. Rubengo who is a director of Savechem, bound himself as surety for the due performance by Savechem of its tenancy obligations. More
Applicant applied to this Court for quantification of damages for loss of employment. The application was made in terms of the Court’s judgment issued on 25 March 2022 which inter alia ordered that;
“2(b) 2nd Respondent (BRDC) shall pay Applicant damages in lieu of reinstatement in an amount either agreed by the parties or assessed by this Court.” More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (‘the court a quo’) wherein it dismissed the appellant’s claim for damages for breach of contract. More
