Electronic Court judgements

Browse Court Judgements by court

The factual position is that this Court dismissed a court application and a counter claim in HC 1456/20 whose judgment in HH 743/20 was delivered in motion court on the 25th November 2020. On the day the judgment was delivered counsel for the applicant was not present in court despite that he was advised to attend court at 1000hrs earlier on the same day at 9.30am. The reason for his failure to attend court hearing being that he was engaged elsewhere. Dissatisfied with this court’s decisions the applicant is desirous to appeal against this court’s decision to the Supreme Court More

The plaintiff and the defendant purportedly customarily married each other in 1997 or 1998. The customary union was not valid as the plaintiff was still married to another woman in terms of the Marriages Act [Cap 5;11]. The plaintiff’s wife died in April or may of 2001immediately after which the plaintiff and the defendant separated as the plaintiff’s family alleged the defendant had caused the plaintiff’s former wife to commit suicide. She threw herself on to a railway line and was crushed to death by a train. The plaintiff and the defendant resumed their customary union in June 2002 after... More

This is an application for the registration of an arbitral award. The application is opposed. More

The applicant prays for a review of the matter and an order that the penalty conditions imposed by the Commissioner General under REF HQ 10/50/180/2023 be set aside and the motor vehicle a Toyota Fortuner be released unconditionally to him. The background of the matter is that applicant entered Zimbabwe via the Beitbridge Border Post in a Toyota Fortuner which he alleges was driven by one Simbarashe Ngoshi and which he had been given and authorised to drive by the owner Tongesai Chigwamba. Notably this version of events in its detail is impugned by the respondent through documentation and analysis... More

This is a matter in which the plaintiff left his motor vehicle for repairs with the 1st defendant in August 2004. When the vehicle was returned to the plaintiff in June 2005, its milometer reflected mileage which the plaintiff considered to be excessive. The matter was reported to the police and the second defendant was charged with the offence of using a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent in contravention of section 57(1)(e) of the Road Traffic Act [Chapter 13:11]. The second defendant was then placed on remand awaiting trial. More