Machote v ZIMDEF (HC 7372 of 2015) [2016] ZWHHC 13 (13 January 2016)

Machote v ZIMDEF (HC 7372 of 2015) [2016] ZWHHC 13 (13 January 2016)

The respondent's appeal does not have high prospects of success, the applicant would be severely prejudiced by not receiving remuneration for work already done, and the respondent would not suffer irreparable prejudice if execution is granted. The balance of convenience favours granting leave to execute pending appeal.

Citation
[2016] ZWHHC 13
Parties
Applicant: Stanley Machote; Respondent: Zimbabwe Manpower Development Fund
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
13 January 2016
Case Number
HC 7372 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Execute Pending Appeal / Ruling on Opposed Application for Leave to Execute Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to execute pending appeal granted
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Stay of Execution Pending Appeal, Registration of Arbitral Awards
Source Language
English

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanley Machote

Applicant

Zimbabwe Manpower Development Fund

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Execute Pending Appeal / Ruling on Opposed Application for Leave to Execute Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether leave to execute judgment pending appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's appeal does not have high prospects of success, the applicant would be severely prejudiced by not receiving remuneration for work already done, and the respondent would not suffer irreparable prejudice if execution is granted. The balance of convenience favours granting leave to execute pending appeal.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to execute pending appeal granted

Orders

  • Leave granted to the applicant to execute the judgment in HC 9609/14 pending determination of the appeal in SC 421/15
  • Respondent to pay costs of suit