The applicant and the second respondent as named in the heading are duly registered companies in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe. The first and third respondents are statutory juristic entities created respectively under the Rural District Council Act [Chapter 23:13] and the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act [Chapter 22:23]. The applicant did not seek any relief against the third respondent which was cited as an interested party that superintends public procurement by procuring authorities in Zimbabwe as defined in that legislation. The dispute which has led to the applicant filing this review application as contended by... More
The applicants are sister companies. They are into sugar-cane growing and sugar processing. They operate in the Southern part of Zimbabwe’s lowveld.
The respondent is the Minister of Environment, Water and Climate. She is the one to whom the President of Zimbabwe assigned the Zimbabwe National Water Authority Act out of which the Zimbabwe National Water Authority [“ZINWA”] was born. ZINWA is a statutory body.
The applicants concluded two agreements with ZINWA’s predecessors. The agreements related to the supply of raw water to the applicants. They were signed in 1961.
The agreements provide that the parties - i.e. the applicants... More
I heard this application on 14 June, 2022. I delivered an ex tempore judgment in which I struck the case off the roll with costs.
On 1 August, 2022 the registrar of this court wrote advising me that the applicant appealed my decision. He requested reasons for the same for purposes of the appeal. My reasons are these:
The applicant, which are six housing co-operatives, were sued by the respondent, the City of Harare, seeking to evict their respective members and them from its Lot 2 of Parkridge Estate which is commonly known a Paddock 27, Crowborough Farm, Harare. In... More
1. This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court handed down on
8 September 2020, declaring “that payment by the applicant (respondent) of the sum of RTGS$235 620,99 together with interest at the prescribed lending rate calculated from 19 February, 2020 to the date of final payment shall be the full and final settlement of the respondent’s (appellant’s) debt.” More
On 26 August 2004, the plaintiff instituted proceedings in the High Court wherein it sued for $60 000 000.00 being the sum assured in terms of a motor vehicle comprehensive policy it held with second defendant. The first defendants were the insurance brokers who facilitated the policy. More
