Court Judgements
Browse Judgements by Year
The dispute relates to a contract of employment wherein respondents allege breach of a contract of employment by failing to pay wages and salaries. Matter was taken to an arbitrator who granted an award on 23rd October 2012. For some unknown reason the award was quantified in November 2015. The matter had been heard in January 2012. Therefore, the cause of action was complete in January 2012 when the respondents were fully aware of the facts constituting their cause of action. More
The two applications were filed separately. The first one was filed on 12 October 2023 under case number HCH 6684/23. The second application was filed on 16 October 2023. They are both urgent court applications for a declaratur and consequential relief in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06]. At a case management meeting held on 17 October 2023 all the parties to both applications consented to the consolidation of the two applications for them to be argued as one. That agreement stemmed from the realization and acceptance that
the cause of action was the same... More
This is an application for reinstatement of a matter on to the roll. It was deemed abandoned in terms of Rule 46 of the Rules of this Court Statutory Instrument 150/17. The application is opposed. At the commencement of the hearing two preliminary issues were taken on behalf of the applicant. More
This is an opposed application in which the applicant sought the following order:
“1. The applicant be and is hereby declared to be the legal owner of stands 14786, 14787 and 14788 Selbourne Park, Bulawayo.
2. The cancellation of the agreement of sale entered into between the applicant and the City of Bulawayo over the purchase and transfer of stands 14786, 14787 and 14788 Selbourne Park, Bulawayo to be declared unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void and of no force and effect and is set aside.
3. The City of Bulawayo’s decision to repossess and sell applicant’s stands 14786, 14787 and... More
The appellant was employed by the respondent as a procurement officer. He was charged with three counts of misconduct for ‘any act of conduct or omission inconsistent with the fulfilment of the express or implied conditions of his or her contract’. These were violations of paragraph 4 (a) of the National Code of Conduct S.I. 15 of 2006. More
This is an appeal against the appellant’s dismissal from the respondent’s employment. He appealed internally but the appeal failed. The appellant was employed by the respondent as a Procurement Officer. He was charged with three (3) counts of violating section 4(a ) of the National Employment Code of Conduct Statutory Instrument 15 of 2006 (S.I.15/06). More
This is an appeal against conviction and sentence. The appellants were convicted after a trial, of attempted murder as defined in s 189(1)(b) as read with s 47(1)(b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. They were each sentenced to 5 years imprisonment of which 2 years imprisonment was suspended for 5 years on condition of good behaviour, leaving an effective imprisonment period of 3 years. More
