Court Judgements
Browse Judgements by Year
This is an application for interim relief by the Applicant (“employer”) against the Respondent (“employee”) pending the hearing and conclusion of an appeal concerning the above quoted parties. More
This is an opposed court application. The facts of the matter are as follows;
The applicant is a qualified surgeon practising as such in Harare. He is a registered member of the respondent. On 15 January 2009, applicant lodged a complaint with the respondent against three of its registered medical practitioners. Applicant believed that the medical practitioners he specifically mentioned in his letter of complaint had committed wrongful acts that constituted professional misconduct in terms of the Health Profession Act, Chapter 27:19. More
The appellant was a clerk of court at Magistrates Court, Karoi, when he was convicted of defeating or obstructing the course of justice. He was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment of which 6 months were suspended for four years on conditions of good behavior. He appeals against both his conviction and sentence. The record shows that two notices of appeal were filed within the stipulated period within which to file the notice, one by his legal practitioners and another by the appellant, personally. As he has since been granted leave to prosecute his appeal in person, nothing should really turn... More
The plaintiff issued summons against the 4 defendants as principal officer and agent (in respect of the first defendant) and as directors of a company known as Kettex Holdings (Pvt) Ltd, in which it sought payment of US$1 579 418 being the value of products delivered to Kettex Holdings (Pvt) Ltd for sale. More
This is an Urgent Chamber Application for a provisional order whose interim relief sought is stated as follows,
“INTERIM RELIEF GRANTED
Pending the determination of this matter applicant is hereby granted the following relief; More
This is an appeal against the respondent’s decision in which it dismissed the appellant from its employ. The appellant was dismissed for:
“Theft or failure to take reasonable care or making improper or unauthorised use of state property or the property of any statutory body, statutory fund or local authority including motor vehicles or the failure to take adequate steps to ensure that reasonable care is taken of any such property or failure to report at the earliest opportunity any loss thereof or damage thereto.” More
The applicants are former employees of the respondent who were dismissed from employment between May and June 2011. A labour dispute having arisen at the time of the termination, such was referred to arbitration in terms of the Labour Act [Cap 28:01].
On 1 November 2011, M.C. Kare, the arbitrator, made an arbitral award directing the respondent to pay the applicant certain terminal benefits. He also gave the parties leave to approach him for quantification of those terminal benefits in the event of any doubt as to quantum. More
