Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
The applicant was charged with the offence of theft. The facts of the case read like a movie. The allegations on which the applicant was placed on remand by the magistrate at Harare on 25 January 2021 were as follows. The narrative starts with one Shadreck Njowa. He is said to have been part of the gang of armed robbers that waylaid a ZB Bank cash in transit vehicle along Harare Chinhoyi road on 6 January 2021 at the 60 kilometre peg. The cash in transit vehicle was carrying a crew of bank representatives and security guards in addition to... More

On 19 May 2016 we dismissed the appellant’s appeal with costs. The appellant requested for reasons for judgment as early as 19 May 2016 but the request was not brought to our attention until 20 March 2017, this explains the delay. The reasons for our dismissal of the appeal are hereby furnished. More

The applicant’s claim is for a provisional order seeking repossession of, equipment and motor vehicles valued at US$1 558 068, 53 and US$96 000.00 respectively. Its cause of action is based on breach of contract on account of the first respondent’s failure to pay the purchase price for the property sold in terms of the agreement of sale. More

: The applicant is a limited liability foreign company incorporated in terms of the laws of Hong Kong whose address of service is No. 7 Livingstone Avenue, Milton Park Harare. Sometime in January 2010 it allegedly concluded an Equipment Sales Contract coupled with a Short Term Loan/Financing scheme with the first respondent. More

This is an application for the review of proceedings conducted by the second respondent sitting at Gutu magistrates’ court on 22 January 2014. The application is made in terms of s 27 of the High Court Act [Chapter7:06]. The application was opposed, however at the hearing there was no appearance for the first respondent, there being a letter on record that the first respondent was to abide by the court’s ruling whilst the Civil Division did not appear on behalf of the second respondent. The brief history of the matter is as follows: the first respondent was arraigned before a... More