AFAS Case Summaries
NAME OF CASE
Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority v Maposa
CASE SUMMARY
The Respondent, an employee of the applicant (ZESA), before the Supreme Court, had been suspended from duty with pay pending investigation into disciplinary charges. After the investigation, ZESA’s Board offered the Respondent an opportunity to resign. The Respondent refused to do so.
NAME OF CASE
Chinhoyi Municipality v Mangwana and Partners Legal Practitioners and Honourable Retired M Chinhengo
CASE SUMMARY
The applicant and the first respondent before the High Court executed a service agreement pursuant to which the applicant engaged the first respondent to collect debts owed to the applicant by residents falling within its jurisdiction. The agreement provided for dispute resolution through conciliation as between the parties. If conciliation failed, the agreement provided that the dispute would be referred to arbitration.
NAME OF CASE
Mtetwa and Another v Mupamhadzi
CASE SUMMARY
Subsequent to the signing by the parties of an agreement for the sale of land and the construction thereon of a house by the appellants, a dispute arose between the parties. The dispute was referred to arbitration.
NAME OF THE CASE
Conplant Technology [Pvt]Ltd V Wentspring Investments [Pvt] Ltd
CASE SUMMARY
The plaintiff’s claim was for payment of a sum of money in respect of labour and materials supplied to, for and on behalf of the defendant. The cost of labour and material amounted to US$32 960.
NAME OF THE CASE
Matthews v Caster Int (Pvt) Ltd
CASE SUMMARY
The applicant before the High Court was an ex-employee of the respondent. A dispute between the applicant and the respondent was referred for arbitration. On 28 June 2012, an arbitral award was issued in favour of the applicant.
NAME OF THE CASE
Old Mutual Investment Group v M and S Driving School and Another
CASE SUMMARY
The applicant before the High Court is a landlord and the respondents are tenants, in terms of a written lease agreement, at applicant’s premises at Metro Centre. In terms of Clause 42 of the lease agreement, the applicant gave 6 months notice to the respondents to vacate the premises to pave way for demolitions of the premises and redevelopment of the site.
NAME OF THE CASE
ZIMSEC v Chinhengo & Another (HH 160-18)
CASE SUMMARY
In 2011, the second respondent won a tender for the binding of applicant’s ‘O’ Level and ‘A’ level result slips for the years 2004 to 2010. Subsequent to that, a contract was entered into between applicant and second respondent.
NAME OF CASE
National Social Security Authority v Chairman, National Social Security Authority Workers Committee and others
SUMMARY OF CASE
This was a review application by the National Social Security Authority in connection with an arbitral award handed down by Mr Chigwendere (arbitrator).
NAME OF CASE
Ebi Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd v Old Mutual Unit Trusts(Pvt)Ltd and another
SUMMARY OF CASE
In May 2004 the applicant and the 1st respondent entered into a software licensing agreement. Following a dispute that arose between the parties in January 2006, the matter was referred to an arbitrator for arbitration.
NAME OF CASE
Makonye v Ramodimoosi and 2 others
SUMMARY OF CASE
The background giving rise to the dispute between applicant and the 1st respondent involved the termination of a lease agreement entered into by the parties on 6 September 2011. The parties had agreed that the 1st respondent would occupy the leased premises on 1 November 2011.
NAME OF CASE
Golden Drive Inv(Pvt) Ltd v Tel One (Pvt) Ltd and another
SUMMARY OF CASE
The appellant is a private company registered in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe. It carries on the business of tobacco contract farming, merchandising and export. The first respondent is a company incorporated in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe.
NAME OF CASE
Ballantyne Butchery (Pvt) Ltd v Chisvinga and Others
SUMMARY OF CASE
This appeal arose from the application of two retrenchment agreements that were entered into between the parties on 23 January 2009. The first agreement stipulated the payment of specified terminal benefits, while the second provided for various payments in kind, i.e. fuel coupons and pork bones.
NAME OF CASE
Biltrans Services (Pvt) Ltd v The Minister of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare and Others
SUMMARY OF CASE
The second to the sixth respondents were employees of the applicant until they were dismissed for misconduct. They were aggrieved by the dismissal and raised a complaint of unfair labour practice with a labour officer, claiming overtime and several other allowances that they alleged the applicant owed them.
