This is an application for review, in which the applicant seeks the setting asideof trial proceedings instituted against him by the respondents and for an order barring the respondents from conducting trial proceedings against the applicant in respect of the allegations for which the applicant was to appear before the first respondent. The application is opposed by the respondents. More
This is an opposed application in which the applicant seeks the following order;-
IT IS ORDERED THAT:-
1. The Respondent be and is hereby ordered to pay to the Applicant a sum of US$1500 per month as and by way of maintenance with effect from the date of this application and thereafter on or before the first day of each month until the main matter under case reference number HC6214/2011 is determined to finality by the court.
2. The Respondent be and is hereby ordered to deposit with Messrs Costa & Madzonga within seven days of the date of this... More
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
