On the 30th of August 2022, the applicant filed what he termed, “Court application for rescission of judgment in terms of common law on the grounds of fraud and error”. The application was strenuously opposed by the 1st and 2nd respondents. On the 18th of October 2022, the 1st respondent not only filed his notice of opposition and opposing affidavit. He also filed a counter application seeking an order for a decree of perpetual silence against the applicant. Both applications were set down for the 17th of March 2023. For ease of reference, I will maintain the same citation of... More
It is not usual that the judge writes a full judgment in an application for default judgment. The usual procedure for recording a default is to simply grant default judgment and make note of reasons for default. In casu, the default judgment was granted on account of the non-appearance of counsel and their clients. When a court considers it necessary to express its displeasure with the parties and counsel’s conduct of proceedings, a judgment is advised because the court speaks through its judgment. More
On 21 May 2021, upon the matter being called, the second respondent’s counsel stood up to advise that he has instructions to apply for my recusal. No prior notice or indication had been given to me as usual practice which counsel adopt. Counsel usually approach the judge whose recusal will be sought in chambers to alert the judge beforehand that his or her recusal is sought. This salutary practice is done to avoid taking the judge by surprise because in a recusal application, the judge must answer the application because it is directed at the judge. Fore warning the judge... More
This is an urgent application seeking a final order committing 1st and 2nd respondents to imprisonment for contempt of court. It also seeks to interdict the 3rd and 4th respondents from confiscating the applicants Motor Vehicle being a Mercedes Benz S320 registration No. 825-412L, Chassis No. WDB220652A 114144, Engine No. 11294430690891 and costs of suit.In the interim the applicant seeks an interdict barring 3rd and 4th respondents from interfering or dispossessing the applicant of the said motor vehicle. He further seeks an order for the immediate release of the motor vehicle from seizure in terms of the Customs and Exercise... More
Did the applicant in this matter set out, in the founding affidavit, facts that distinguish the case from others to justify the granting of the order for urgent hearing without breach of the principle that similarly situated litigants are entitled to be treated alike? See Mayor Logistics Private Limited v Zimbabwe Revenue Authority1. More
