On 13 October 2018, the parties contracted their marriage in terms of the Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11]. The marriage was blessed with two children, Kabelo Lenny Mashanda born on 21 July 2016 and Khanyiso Kelton Mashanda born on 25 November 2019. On 13 July 2020, the plaintiff issued summons for the dissolution of the marriage claiming a decree of divorce and a division of the matrimonial assets. In his declaration he stated that the parties were in the process of acquiring a 300m² residential stand through the City of Harare, that he had paid an initial deposit and made a... More
The hearing commenced with the applicant making an application for the uplifting of a bar. The applicant was barred for failure to file heads of argument in terms of the rules. The application for the upliftment of the bar was opposed. Accepting that the failure to file heads was due to a junior legal practitioner leaving the practice of the applicant’s legal practitioners without proper handover, I decided that it was in the interests of justice for me to grant the application. I granted the application with costs on a legal practitioners and client scale. More
Family law -Chamber application for guardianship - This matter was placed before me in chambers. The applicant seeks an order that he be awarded guardianship of his almost seventeen year old grandchild K. N born on the 4th of November 2001. More
Applicant and respondent are husband and wife having married in terms of the Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11] on 27 September 1997. The marriage was blessed with two children who are now adults. During the subsistence of the marriage, they acquired a property known as Lot 4 of Chimwemwe of subdivision A Kingsmead of Borrowdale Estate measuring 4212 square metres ( the property). Applicant says the property was acquired by his optional shares from his previous employment. The property was subdivided and stand 916 Borrowdale Township of Lot 4 of Chimwemwe of Subdivision A of Kingsmead Extension of Borrowdale Estate measuring... More
This case raises the preliminarypoint as to whetherthe HighCourt has power to review decisionsofaLabourCourt.It wasarguedin limine that the HighCourtdoesnothavejurisdiction toreviewlabourmatters. Thereasoningwas thatsince boththeHigh Court and the LabourCourthave the samepowersof reviewin labour matters,thisputs themat par. The first respondent argued that the applicant should have approached the Supreme Court on appeal sincethat court could have exercised its review powers in hearing the matter in terms of s 25 of the Supreme Court Act [Chapter7:13]. More
