KARWI J: The appellant was arraigned before the Magistrates’ court at Bindura facing six counts as follows:
Count One: Assault as defined in s 89 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Cap 9:23]
Count Two: Undermining Police Authority as defined in s 177 (a) (1) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Cap 9:23]
Count Three: Assaulting a Police Officer as defined in s 176 of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform Act) [Cap 9:23]
Count Four: Assault as defined in s 89 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Cap 9:23]... More
The parties are involved in an ownership dispute of certain mines situated in Kadoma. Sometime in July 2009 they entered into a written agreement in terms of which they swapped certain mining claims with the applicant taking over mining blocks known as Gazemba 105 to 108 belonging to the respondent. In terms of that agreement, the respondent was to take over certain gold mining claims belonging to the applicant. More
The applicant is the registered user of certain trade marks belonging to AECI Limited, a South African registered company. The same marks were assigned by their proprietor to ICI South Africa (Pty) Ltd which assignment does not affect the status of the registered user, the applicant. More
This is an application which, in the main, seeks an order ad pecuniam solvendam. In other words, the claim is for the first respondent (hereinafter called “CABS”) to pay to the applicant the sum of US$179, 541-45 within seven (7) days from the date of the order, plus 5% percent interest on the aforesaid sum from 5 December 2016 to date of payment. Alternatively, the applicant asks for an order that the respondents pay the applicant the sum of US$179, 541.45, jointly and severally, the one paying the others to be absolved. In addition, the applicant seeks an order nullifying... More
[ 1] Plaintiff, a peregrine entity, seeks to recover monies lent and advanced to first defendant, a local company. The second and third defendants were sued in their capacity as sureties and co-principal debtors.
[ 2] Plaintiff closed its case after the testimony of its single-Mrs Melina Matshiya-a senior legal practitioner. Mr. Uriri for the defendants moved the court to grant absolution from the instance. Counsel premised his application on two arguments;-(a) that plaintiff had tendered no evidence at all before the court. Mrs Matshiya, its representative and sole witness lacked valid authority to represent it and was as such,... More
