This is an application for summary judgment against the three respondents who are the defendants in Case No. HC 8904/10 (hereinafter referred to as “the main matter” or “the action”). The applicant is the plaintiff in the main matter, in which it instituted proceedings for the ejectment of the respondents from the assistant manager’s house at Good Hope Farm. The facts which underlie the dispute between the parties are as follows: More
The applicant employed the respondent as its Group Audit Manager. In that capacity she enjoyed the benefit of the use of a company motor vehicle, a Mazda Familiar, registration number AAM 7769 (“the vehicle”). The vehicle remained the property of the applicant. More
This is application for summary judgment. Applicant issued summons against respondent in which he is claiming the following relief-
1. Cancellation of lease agreement between the parties in respect of the property known as number 37 Hillview Road, Philadelphia, Harare.
2. Ejectment of respondent from number 37 Hillview Road, Philadelphia, Harare.
3. Payment of arrear rentals accrued from February 2009 to July 2010.
4. An order for payment of holding over damages at US$750.00 per month.
5. Costs of suit. More
The plaintiff owns premises which are being rented by the defendant. The plaintiff is a company dully incorporated in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe. Its shareholding has changed by virtue of its majority shareholders selling their shares to Regimos Paints the current majority shareholder. More
The applicant is a company duly incorporated in terms of the Companies and Other Businesses Act [Chapter 24:31]. The first respondent is an administrative authority responsible for the collection of taxes and is established in terms of the Revenue Authority Act [Chapter 23:11] (“the Revenue Authority Act”). The applicant was placed under corporate rescue in terms of the Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07] and as a consequence, its affairs fall entirely under the administration of a Corporate Rescue Practitioner (CRP). More
