Court Judgements
Browse Judgements by Year
This is an appeal against an arbitral award handed down on 22 September, 2011. The Respondent was employed by the Appellant as a Messenger from April 2006 under a Grade B1 salary. In April 2010 the Respondent was transferred from the Head Office to work at the Training Centre as a Workshop Assistant. It is common cause that the person he replaced at the Training Centre took his job as a Messenger and was downgraded from Grade B3 to B1. More
This is an appeal from the decision of an Arbitrator who found that the termination of the Respondents’ Contract of employment by the Appellant (ZESA) was unlawful and he ordered that ZESA should retrench the Respondents.
The facts of the matter are that the Respondents were employed by ZESA on three months fixed term contracts. These contracts were renewed for periods varying between 2 and 4 years, on 4 August 2010, ZESA gave notice that the contracts would not be renewed. The Respondents’ were dissatisfied with the termination of their contracts and they claimed that they had been unfairly dismissed. More
CHIGUMBA J: Plaintiff issued summons against the defendants, on 24 March 2011, claiming:
1. An order declaring that Plaintiff is the lawful owner of stand 449 Borrowdale Brooke Township of stand 137 Borrowdale Brooke township (hereinafter referred to as the property in question).
2. An order setting aside the caveat placed on Deed of transfer number 4012/2010 at the instance of the second defendant.
3. An order compelling the first defendant to take all necessary steps required in order to effect transfer to the Plaintiff of the property situate in the district of Salisbury called stand 449 Borrowdale Brooke township... More
The applicant filed an application seeking an order for substituted service in terms of Order 6 Rule 46. The facts of the matter are as set out in the applicants founding affidavit and may be summarised as follows: More
This is an appeal against an arbitral award where the arbitrator ruled in favour of the now Respondents in a case where the parties were locked in a dispute of over certain allowances and the reduction of the now Respondents’ employment contract to wiring. More
The applicant is the registered conglomeration of trade unions and is engaged in the furtherance of its members’ interests. The first respondent is the regulating authority for Harare Central in terms of the Public Order and Security Act [Cap 11:17] (the Act) while the second and third respondents are the Commissioner General of Police and the Co-ministers of Home Affairs under whose authority the first respondent falls. More
This is an application for the urgent stay of arbitral award which was issued in favor of the 1st Respondent and registered with the High Court followed by attempted execution by the 2nd Respondent.
Facts of the case are that the 1st Respondent hereinafter referred to as the employee found himself before arbitration on a claim which he had against the Applicant hereinafter referred to as the employer. The Arbitrator made an order in favour of the employee. Armed with that order, the employee registered the same with the High Court. After the registration of the award, execution of the... More
