The applicant is a Chief Mining Engineer and Shareholder in 2nd respondent, which is a mining entity under judicial management. He seeks a prohibitory interdict, which is specific to the 1st respondent. The applicant claims to have founded the 2nd respondent in 2003. 2nd respondent specializes in gold mining and processing. 1st respondent is a legal practitioner, and the judicial manager of the 2nd respondent. He has some financial interest in the 2nd respondent having made significant financial investment in that entity. The arrangement was that applicant and 1st respondent would get shareholding in 2nd respondent, commensurate with their investment.... More
In this matter the applicant was sued by the respondent for adultery damages in the sum of $25 000.00 being $12 500.00 for contumelia and $12 500.00 for loss of comfort solicity and services of the spouse i.e. loss of consortium. The applicant on being served with the summons and declaration duly entered appearance to defend and filed his plea under case No. HC 4093/16. More
The first and second applicants are elected councilors for Wards 17 and 24 forHarare and Bulawayo City Councils respectively. They were elected into office in July 2018 on tickets of a political party called the People’s Democratic Party(PDP)which contested the elections under a coalition of political parties going by the moniker MDC-A.First applicant is also the mayor of Harare. More
The applicant was a councilor for Mt Pleasant and also a mayor of Harare City council. The allegations where that the applicant in the period between 1 March 2020 and 31 March 2020 asked one Addmore Nhekairo who was the Director of Housing, to allocate residential stands to Rotina Mafume his sister and Rutendo Muvuti a work colleague at Mafume Law Chambers. It was further alleged that at the time this request came, the interviews for Westlea stands had already closed and the two beneficiaries were not on the waiting list therefore did not have waiting list numbers. The applicant... More
This is an appeal made in terms of s 121 (1) of the Criminal Procedure & Evidence Act [Chapter 9:23] (“the CPEA”) as read with r 6 (1) of the High Court of Zimbabwe Bail Rules, 1971, pursuant to the Magistrates Court’s dismissal of the appellant’s application for bail pending trial. More
