Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
In terms of the Facility Letter which the parties signed on 15 February 2011, the plaintiff advanced the sum of $130 000.00 to the defendants. The maturity date of the loan was 15 February, 2012. More

This is an application for summary judgment in terms of r 64. The plaintiff issued summons claiming against the defendant the sum of $47 808-00 being the outstanding amount owed to it by the defendant arising from a personal loan advanced to the defendant. It also claimed interest at the rate of 15% per annum, a penalty on unpaid interest at the rate of 2 % per day from 31st August 2015 to date of payment in full plus costs on the legal practitioner and client scale. More

Applicants were arrested and charged with (i) contravening s 126 (1) (a) and (b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] ie. Robbery and (iii) rape as defined in s 65 1 (a) and (b) of the said Code. More

The appellantis being charged with robbery as defined in s126 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. His application for bail pending trial was refused on the basis that: 1. His alleged accomplices are still at large 2. The case against him is strong as he was in close proximity to the complainant. Therefore the issue of mistaken identity seems improbable even though this is a triable issue. 3. The evidence against him is overwhelming and this might induce him to abscond 4. Thus there are compelling reasons to deny him bail. More

The 2nd respondent instituted proceedings for divorce and ancillary relief in case No. HC 1195/04 against the applicant. The applicant filed a counter-claim in which he cited the 1st respondent as the 2nd defendant in that matter. He claimed from the 1st respondent adultery damages alleging that the 1st respondent was the man with whom the second respondent had committed adultery. During the pre-trial conference, the court queried the propriety of joining the 1st respondent in a counter-claim. The applicant now seeks, in terms of Order 13 Rule 87 of the High Court Rules, to join the 1st respondent to... More