This chamber application was opposed by the first respondent. I set it down for hearing on 21 July 2024. Applicant and Counsel for first respondent appeared. Applicant requested a postponement as he felt that his relatives had to be present. He indicated that he had not been aware of the set down date and only appeared because the Registrar of this court had called him on his cell phone. Counsel for the first respondent was not opposed to the application for postponement. I postponed the matter to 1 July 2024 at 1000hours. More
This is a chamber application for joinder wherein the applicant seeks to be joined as a party to the proceedings in Case No. HCH 884/24, a court application for review. The relief sought by the applicant is captured as follows:
“1. The application be and is hereby granted.
2. Applicant be and is hereby joined as 2nd respondent in HCH 884/24.
3. The Applicant be and is hereby ordered to file its opposing papers, if any, in HCH 884/24 within 5 days of the granting of this order.
4. The opposing respondents shall pay the costs of this application.” More
This is an urgent chamber application in which the applicants essentially seek stay of execution on of the order granted in case No. HC 2258/21 pending determination of a court application for the rescission of that order. The court application is yet to be filed. The application for rescission of judgment could not be filed prior to or at the time of the filing of the urgent chamber application owing to the Covid 19 induced lockdown and the Practice Direction issued pursuant thereto. The interim relief sought is for first respondent to be interdicted from interfering with second and third... More
In this matter applicants seeks leave to file a supplementary affidavit in Case No HC 3261/23 in terms of Rule 59(12) of the High Court Rules, 2021.
The founding affidavit was deposed to by the fourth applicant who is the mother to the first to third applicants. More
The plaintiffs issued summons against the defendants claiming the sum of US$402 000-00 being ‘excess of costs that the plaintiffs will pay for the construction of 3 villas on stand number 553 Quinnington Township Borrowdale’. The plaintiff further claimed interest on the above sum calculated at the prescribed rate plus costs of suit.
The second defendant gave notice in terms of the rules that, unless the summons were withdrawn, it would except thereto. The summons not having been withdrawn, the second defendant duly filed the exception simultaneously with a special plea. The second defendant excepted on the grounds that the... More
