It seems to me quite unacceptable if not completely dishonorable for a litigant who has the benefit of legal counsel to repeatedly approach the same court on the same facts and in respect of the same cause of action, seeking almost the same relief which has previously not found favour with the court, a court which has pronounced itself very clearly on the matter. Not once, not twice but thrice, this court has expressed the view that the plaintiff’s claim that he purchased stand 1092 Umtali Township, also known as No 26 Jameson Road Mutare (the property) and that it... More
The first respondent obtained an order under case number HC 10809/13 to eject the second respondent and all those claiming occupation of stand 1092 Umtali Township, through him. The first respondent avers that the applicant occupies the stand through the second respondent and is therefore liable to be ejected in terms of the eviction order obtained by the first respondent against the second respondent. More
: The plaintiff issued summons out of this court seeking a decree of divorce and other ancillary relief. The facts of this matter are not in dispute and may be summarized as follows. The plaintiff and defendant are husband and wife. They married in terms of the Marriages Act [Cap 5:11] on 24 August 1996. They have one minor child a little boy aged 11. In 2008 the parties separated due to marital differences. They have not lived together as husband and wife since that time. They are both certain that the marriage has broken down to such an extent... More
This is an application for condonation of late noting of an appeal and extension of time to note an appeal.
The applicant is a former member of the Zimbabwe Republic Police. He was a constable. Following allegations of misconduct, he was charged and was tried before a single officer. He was found liable and sentenced to 7 days imprisonment at Fairbridge Detention Barrack. He did not appeal against the decision. On 30 December 2016, the applicant was discharged from service after a board of suitability made recommendations to the first respondent for his dismissal. The applicant noted an appeal to... More
This is a chamber application for the dismissal of respondent’s action under case number HC 2474/16 made in terms of Rule 75 (1) of the High Court Rules 1971 on the ground that it is frivolous and vexatious. More
