It is not the function of the courts to make a contract for the parties or to rewrite a contract entered into between the parties. Neither is it open to the courts to excuse any party to a contract from the imperatives of the contract they have freely and voluntarily accepted on the basis that it has become too onerous or oppressive. In addition, it is not allowed to read into the contract some implied or tacit term that is in direct conflict with its express terms. See Magodora & Ors v Care International Zimbabwe 2014 (1) ZLR 397 (S)... More
: The Applicant in this matter is a company registered as such in terms of the company law of Zimbabwe. The first Respondent is the presiding officer who granted the warrant of search and seizure which is under review. The second to fourth Respondents are employees of the fifth Respondent. The fifth Respondent is a constitutional and public entity charged with the responsibility of investigating corruption. More
Sometime in or around November 2015 and at Harare the plaintiff and the defendant entered into an agreement in terms of which the defendant agreed to repair and fit 3 500 seat holding brackets at the plaintiff’s Rainbow Towers Hotel and Conference Centre. The total cost of repairing and fitting the 3 500 seat brackets was quoted by the defendant at US$50 015.00. More
This matter has its dispute steeped in oral African Customary principles of succession concerned with the nomination and appointment of the fourth defendant as headman Mubaiwa which the plaintiff is challenging, arguing that he is the rightful candidate to be declared headman of the Mubaiwa people. More
