The plaintiffs approached this court seeking an order declaring the will of the late Chitsamatanga, dated 26 May 2000, null and void, that the testator died intestate and an order for costs.
The basis for the order being sought is that at the time the testator executed the will, he was not in a mental state to execute a valid will as he was aged 86 and was senile.
Alternatively the testator could not appreciate the nature of his actions as he had high visual impairment. This necessitated that the will be read to him and he could have been... More
[1] The germ seed of the dispute before me is foreign currency, an indispensable enabler of local and in particular, international trade and commerce.
[2] This resource is also regulated, and quite stringently too, by a compendium of instruments. These range from primary and subsidiary legislation, a raft of directives, measures and circulars, to periodic policy statements by treasury and the central bank. This background forms part of the wider discretionary considerations relevant to the resolution of the present dispute. More
This is an application contemplated by s 350 of the Companies Act [Cap 24:03] for security of costs in the sum of US$20 000-00 filed on 7 September 2011. The applicant also seeks a stay of the main matter until such costs have been paid and costs of the present application. It arises from a letter written by the respondent’s legal practitioners on 9 May 2011 confirming that the respondent was a dormant company with no assets save for the property in dispute. More
Applicant seeks the setting aside of a judgment entered in her absence. She also pursues, as consequential relief, joinder to the same proceedings in HC 1202/21. The application is brought under rule 29 of the High Court Rules SI 202/21 (rule 449 of the old High Court Rules 1971). Applicant`s claim herein is based on what she describes as her direct and substantial interest, as a lessee, in a farm from where she now faces eviction. More
The plaintiff in this matter claims the repair and delivery of his Audi 200 motor vehicle or, in the alternative, payment in the sum of $900 million as damages in respect of the replacement value of the vehicle. The defendant disputes liability on the main and alternative claim and, in any event, invokes the owner’s risk disclaimer clause in the repair contract as absolving it of any liability to the plaintiff. More
