This application for a declaratur was made in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06], and the applicant petitioned the court to declare null and void, a certificate of registration in respect of nine gold reefs that were registered in the name of the first respondent. The declaratur was sought on the grounds that the claim was registered on ground that was not open to prospecting and pegging and that it was registered in violation of the prior pegger principle. The applicant and the first respondent are both mining entities registered in accordance with the laws... More
This application was filed as an urgent chamber application and although I had misgivings about its urgency I decided to set it down because it concerned a project of national interest. I therefore felt that I could not do justice to such an important matter by declining to hear it on my preliminary view that it did not deserve to be heard on an urgent basis. For this reason I directed that it be set down so that the parties could ventilate on the issue of urgency. More
Applicant has instituted an urgent chamber application against first, second and third respondent claiming a provisional order in the following terms:-
Terms of final order sought
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be granted that
(1) The applicant be declared the rightful owner of the mine called Virginia 2 registration number 4588 in Kadoma and Virginia 7 registration number 4589 in Kadoma.
(2) That the first respondent pay costs on a legal practitioner and client scale.
Interim order granted.
(1) The Notice issued in the Government gazette published on the 8th January... More
The applicant and the first respondent entered into a Services Agreement on 29 December 2009. It was for a fixed period, (though providing for renewal) terminating on 31 October 2015. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the Gweru Magistrates court delivered on 20 April 2010 in which the court a quo inter alia granted sole custody of two minor children to the respondent without also granting appellant reasonable access, maintenance in respect of the appellant in the sum of $300,00 per month and a reciprocal protection order against both parties. More
