Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
This is a matter within which the plaintiff is claiming damages for loss of support owing to the death of her husband at the defendant’s instance. On 23 December 2016, the plaintiff’s husband was electrocuted and died after he unwittingly stepped on live electricity wiring. The wiring had been left exposed by the defendant company and thus posed a danger to any person who would have used the public path it lay across. After the defendant’s accident, the defendant’s employees were forced to switch off wires from their nearby electricity feeder station in order to remove the deceased’s body from... More

The plaintiff claims payment of $119 113, 50 arising from a contractual arrangement to supply a jet machine to the defendant. More

On 24 January 2017 I heard this application and delivered an ex tempore judgment dismissing it with costs. I have now been asked for the written reasons which I do hereby furnish. More

Kojo Malcom Parris (“Parris”) intended to sell his house in Harare. He instructed an acquaintance, June Mossdorf, (“Mossdorf”) of Fox & Carney Estate Agents to market the immovable property for him. He was by that time resident in South Africa. Mossdorf found the plaintiffs with whom she negotiated and agreed on a possible sale. The plaintiffs paid a deposit to Mossdorf. When she asked Parris to instruct his lawyers to draw the necessary papers, he refused. She instructed his lawyers to proceed with the sale as she believed a binding contract of sale was in existence. The lawyers refused to... More

The Applicant claims to be the registered owner of a mining claim known as ME3448G SCRAI A, located in Goromonzi district. He states that on 13 January 2025, while conducting operations at the site, the second Respondent arrived with a group of assistants and advised him that he was supposed to vacate the mining site. According to the Applicant, the second Respondent presented a warrant of ejectment, a bond of indemnity, and a letter from the first Respondent’s legal representatives. The Applicant contends that none of these documents referred to or identified him. More