CHIGUMBA J: This is an urgent chamber application in which the applicants seek the following relief:
TERMS OF ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this Honorable Court why a final order should not be made on the following terms:-
1. That the order and judgment in case No 112 9052/11 granted on 23 November 2011 by the Honorable Chiweshe J. granting occupation to Chamunorwa Charles Mutyambizi of the farm subdivision 1 of Charmaine of Dryton in Seke District of Mashonaland Eat and ordering Jose Marcelino Goncalves and M.M Pretorius P/L to give vacant occupation of the said farm be... More
The plaintiff and the defendant married each other in 1999 in terms of customary law. They upgraded their marriage to a civil one in terms of the Marriage Act [Cap 5:11] on 25 April 2004. Their marriage was blessed with a daughter Tatenda born on 14 March 2000. More
The petitioner challenged the respondent’s election as councilor during 29 March, 2008 harmonized elections. The matter was referred to the Electoral Court for determination of the following issues:
1. Whether the petitioner is properly before the court in the absence of security for costs;
2. Whether the first respondent obtained clearance in terms of s 119 (5) of the Electoral Act [Cap 2:13]; and
3. Whether the election of the first respondent is valid in the circumstances. More
The applicant and second respondent lived together as man and wife for about 10 years. Certain unhappy differences arose as a result of which they could no longer continue staying together. On 4 June 2001, second respondent issued summons against applicant claiming, inter alia, an order that House No. 5465 Budiriro Township be declared her sole and exclusive property. More
This is an appeal against the decision of the Magistrates Court which granted the respondent’s claim for appellant’s eviction from Stand 4733 Ushewokunze, Harare. Despite the appellant’s opposition to the eviction claim on the basis that this stand was allocated to his wife Pelagia Nyemba, the court a quo made a finding that the respondent who was the plaintiff in the matter was the rightful owner of the stand in question. It ordered the eviction of the appellant and all those claiming occupation through him. More
