On 31 March 2009 the Court issued the following order in this matter:
"IT IS DECLARED THAT:
(1) The refusal to refer the constitutional issue in the magistrate court in the matter of The State v Tom Beattie Pvt Ltd and Thomas Irving Beattie to the Supreme Court for determination was wrongful and was consequently a breach of the applicants’ right to protection of law under section 18(1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
(2) Section 277(3), as read with section 277(5), of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] is consistent with section 18(1), as read with section... More
This is an urgent chamber application for an order directing the Registrar to set down for hearing on an urgent basis the main application the applicants purported to file on 1 March 2018. The applicants are political parties represented by Mr Mukwazhe, who is the leader of the first applicant. In the application purportedly filed on 1 March 2018, under case no. CCZ 11/18 (the main application), the applicants did not seek leave to file the application. An endorsement was made on the application to the effect that leave to apply for direct access to the Constitutional Court (“the Court”)... More
The applicant in this matter is a self-actress seeking the indulgence of this Court to begranted condonation for non-compliance with the Rules. On 29 March 2023, her applicationfor direct access to this Court under Case No. CCZ 55/22 was struck off the roll due to herfailure to effect proper service on the first respondent. The application was one of many suitsbetween the applicant and the firstrespondent who have beendeadlocked inprotractedlitigationsince2016when thelatter sought toevict theformer from hisproperty.
The dispute between the parties appeared to have reached finality when the SupremeCourt, in Case No.SC 443/21, dismissed the applicant’s appeal in which she... More
On 8 December 2022, the High Court, sitting at Harare, dismissed an urgent chamber application for an order of a stay of execution mounted by the applicants in response to an advert for the sale in execution of immovable properties at the instance of the first respondent herein. In determining the matter, the High Court held that the application for an order of a stay of execution of the properties was ill-fated due to the fact that the premise upon which the applicants sought reliance was not in their favour. More
After hearing submissions by counsel in the two applications, the Court made the following order:
“After considering the papers filed in this matter and hearing submissions by counsel, the Court unanimously concludes that both applications have no merit and are hereby dismissed with costs on the ordinary scale.” More
