Plaintiff caused the issuance of summons against the defendants wherein he claimed:
1. Payment of an amount of US$ 10 402.42 (ten thousand four hundred and two United States dollars and forty two cents) being the duty amount levied by ZIMRA on a vehicle sold to plaintiff by defendants.
2. Payment of car hire charges at the rate of RTGS 600 (six hundred RTGS dollars) per day from 18 December 2019 to the date of release of the vehicle from ZIMRA or to the date of full refund of the purchase price by defendants.
3. Alternatively, failing (1) above, the... More
The matter was allocated to me on 24 January 2017 and I immediately set it down for hearing that very day. It started off with the first eight (8) cited
respondents who increased to ten (10) when I granted an order for intervention by the last 2
(two) respondents. More
In this opposed application, the applicant prays for the setting aside of an arbitral award of Z Mutimutema and M Ruziva sitting together as joint arbitrators chosen by the applicant and the first respondent. The application is premised on Article 34 (2) (b) (ii) of the Model Law to the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15] which provides for the power of the court to set aside an arbitral award if it is against the public policy of Zimbabwe. The first respondent opposed the application and prayed for its dismissal with costs. The second and third respondents are the arbitrators whose arbitral... More
A short judgment in this application is considered necessary in order to clear confusion which may arise on account of the orders which I shall make. It is therefore necessary to give a brief background to this application.
The two applicants were jointly charged with two counts of the offence of stock theft as defined in s 114 of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform), Act [Chapter 9:23]. They were each convicted as charged on 13 February 2015 by the magistrate sitting at Guruve Magistrates Court. The applicants were sentenced on the first count to 16 years imprisonment each with... More
This is an urgent chamber application in terms of which the applicant Fidelity Life Assurance of Zimbabwe Limited hereinafter referred to as Fidelity seeks a provisional order whose terms of the final order sought and interim relief granted are as follows:
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to the Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. That a final interdict barring respondent from carrying out developments and construction activities on the property being a certain piece of land situate in the District of Salisbury being the remaining extent... More
