Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
The reason behind these unusual circumstances was caused by a major dispute between applicant and its second set of legal practitioners. Basing on the withdrawals and tendering of wasted costs by applicant second to fifth respondents raised a bill of costs for taxation. There were a number of postponements to the hearing for the taxation of the bill of costs leading to the hearing on 25 June 2024. At the taxation, applicant was legally represented. It was clarified that the bill of costs was predicated upon the tendered wasted costs when heads of argument and notice of opposition were withdrawn... More

The applicant, Auriga Mineral Exploration (Pvt) Ltd, a holder of an Exclusive Prospecting Order Number 1806 (EPO 1806) which it says was issued in 2021 for a three-year period has brought this urgent application for an interdict. The basis is that the first respondent Korzim Strategic Minerals (Pvt) Ltd, has dangerously mined across a road by constructing a tunnel underneath it on the Shamva–Nyagande Road. The Applicant says it detected mining activities in its prospecting area on the 3rd of November 2023 through satellite images and went on an investigative mission to the site. It found dangerous workings on site... More

This is an appeal against a magistrate’s decision dismissing the appellant’s court application for unjust enrichmentmade in terms of Order 22 of the Magistrates Court Rules, 1980. More

The applicant is on trial before the first respondent, charged with criminal abuse of duty as a public officer as defined in s 174(1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. The definition of the crime was recently amended. The amendments have no bearing on the issues raised by this review since the crime was allegedly committed before the amendments. More

This is an appeal against conviction and sentence. The appellant was convicted of rape as defined in s 65(1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. He was sentenced to 8 years imprisonment of which 3 years were suspended for 5 years on the usual condition of good behaviour, to leave the effective custodial term of 5 years. More