The common cause facts are that the plaintiff was the first person to be offered subdivision 2 Munemi Extension Zvimba, Mashonaland West in 2002. Notably, he is a valid offer letter holder. It is indisputable that there is no evidence of the withdrawal nor the intention to withdraw, let alone communication or proof of communication of the same or the said offer letter that was placed on record. Substantively, the plaintiff’s offer letter is extant. It has also not been challenged that the plaintiff has invested heavily on this piece of property. On the other hand, the 1st defendant, does... More
The accused person was aged 20 years, when he was tried and convicted of 2 counts of rape on a minor girl then aged 9 years, in 2022. He was sentenced to an effective 15 years from a sentence of 18 years with 3 suspended on good behaviour. He is appealing against both conviction and sentence. His grounds of appeal are basically that the court erred in making a finding that there was rape when the medical affidavit could not confirm the same. Further, that the evidence of the complainant was inconsistent as to the place where the rape took... More
This application for condonation of late noting of appeal and extension of time within which to note an appeal against conviction and sentence has no merit and is dismissed. More
The following is common cause. The 2nd respondent purchased from the 3rd respondent stand number 46 Murombedzi Growth Point, Murombedzi ‘the property’. The 3rd respondent is a Rural District Council. They entered into a lease with an option to buy agreement. On the 26th of May 2015 the 2nd respondent sold the property to the applicant in the sum of US$3 600.00. It was agreed as between the parties that, US$1 800.00 shall be paid in cash to the 2nd respondent on signature. The balance of US$1 800.00 was payable to the 3rd respondent to clear all outstanding arrears for... More
This is an opposed application wherein, applicants seek rescission of a default judgment of this court under case HC199/22, delivered on the 24th of November of the same year. It has been brought in terms of rule 29 (1) (a) of the High Court rules, 2021. The justification being that, applicants were interested parties with direct and substantial interest but were not made part to the lawsuit with adverse consequences. More
