The applicant was convicted by a magistrate court sitting at Harare on a charge of contravening section 136 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Cap 9.23]. It was alleged that on the date unknown to the prosecutor but during the period extending from July 2012 to June 2013 and at LL Promotions, Harare, applicant unlawfully and with intend to defraud or realising that there was a real risk or possibility of defrauding, misrepresented to complainant Langton Chawota that he had a diplomatic bag in Benin, which contained USD 10 million which he wanted to be repatriated to Zimbabwe... More
This appeal centres on a land ownership dispute in Manjonjo Village, Murehwa. In hearing the matter de novo as per s 24(2) of the Customary law and Local Courts Act [Chapter 7:05] the Magistrate determined that the focus should be to ascertain, on a balance of probabilities, who is the owner of the land in the sense of who was actually allocated the land in the initial instance upon the facts submitted. This was in contrast to the Chief’s approach in the community court where the matter had been decided as if the dispute was one of boundaries. More
This is an application to strike out the declaration filed by the plaintiff on the ground that it is superfluous.
The plaintiff issued an endorsed summons which was accompanied by a declaration. Appearance to defend was then filed on behalf of the defendants. Subsequently the defendants requested for further particulars to which the plaintiff responded. The defendants again sought further and better particulars to which the plaintiff responded. The defendants then wrote to the plaintiff pointing out that the filing of a declaration was superfluous since the plaintiff had opted to file an endorsed summons. The defendants intimated an intention... More
This is a case in which originallythe plaintiff, Michael Johnson, sought payment from the first defendant, PhilipEllse, of the sum of US$80 000-00 (eighty thousand United States Dollars) being the outstanding amount owed to the plaintiff for an outstanding loan together with interest up to the in duplum limit. More
The applicant seeks an order in the following terms:
“1. The decision of the first respondent dismissing the applicant’s application for
discharge at the close of the State case under case number CRB 9311/19 be and is
hereby set aside.
2. The applicant be and is hereby discharged and acquitted at the close of State case under CRB 9311/19.
3. Each party to bear its own costs.” More
