The applicant is an accused in a criminal trial at Harare Magistrates Courts in which he faces two counts of fraud as defined in s 136 (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) act [Chapter 9:23] hereinafter referred to as (“The Code”). More
The parties are apparently engaged in bitter acrimonious divorce proceedings. On 01 October 2012 they appeared before me for a pre-trial conference in terms of the rules of Court. At that hearing counsel for the plaintiff mooted the need to separate the divorce proceedings from the division of property issues. As this was a novel suggestion to me I queried whether it was legally competent to determine the two issues separately. Mr. Fitches counsel for the plaintiff stated that this was possible on the basis of the precident set out in the case of Chivhiya v Chivhiya for which he... More
This is an appeal against the order of the Magistrate in the court a quo. The grounds of appeal are that the learned Magistrate in the court a quo had erred and misdirected herself in not raising meru motu the issue of jurisdiction as the claim was in excess of the jurisdiction of the Magistrates court. It was further contended in the notice of appeal that the learned Magistrate had misdirected herself by failing to appreciate that as Stand 633 Fletcher Road, Norton had been acquired from a previous marriage and had since been sold. Appellant did not own Mitengo... More
The applicant and the respondent are presently involved in proceedings before this court under HC 9837/19 in which the applicant in casu is “the plaintiff”, while the respondent is “the defendant”. In order to avoid confusion, and consistent with the citation of the parties in the main proceedings, I will refer to the parties as they are cited in those proceedings. Additionally, for completeness of the record, I mention that they were married in terms of an unregistered customary law union, which was terminated by the plaintiff on 24 November 2019 when he gave the defendant a divorce token called... More
The plaintiff herein seeks the cancellation of an agreement between the parties for the sale of a motor vehicle and damages for breach of contract in the sum of US$6,500. The principal issues for determination are whether the defendant represented that it was the owner of the motor vehicle and whether it breached the contract of sale by not guaranteeing vacant possession of the vehicle to the plaintiff. More
