The above appeals are all centred on the decision of the respondent refusing to allow as permissible deductions in terms of section 15(2)(gg) of the Income Tax Act [Cap 23:06] certain expenditures incurred by the appellants. To the extent that there are minimal disputes of fact and to the extent that the issues of law raised are the same, it was agreed to consolidate the matters and to issue a single judgment covering all the appellants. More
On 3 February 2021, the applicants filed an urgent chamber application seeking to interdict the enforcement of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) (Standard Scale of Fines) Notice 2021 (“SI 25/21”), which was published in an extraordinary Government Gazette on 25 January 2021. Perhaps, it is important to begin by giving the context in which this application was filed and came before me. It is common cause that, on 28 March 2020, the Public Health (Covid-19 Prevention, Containment and Treatment and Treatment) Regulations 2020, Statutory Instrument 77 of 2020 (“SI 77/20”) came in force. This piece of legislation contained provisions... More
Litigants in this country are fast developing this unacceptable and indeed detestful habit of trifling with courts of law and in the process succeeding in bringing the courts to disrepute. There is no other way of describing the opposition to this application for registration of an arbitral award made against the respondent by D Mudzengi, an arbitrator, on 7 June 2011 than to say that it is trifling with the court in a regrettable manner.
The applicant was employed by the respondent, and from the papers before, me she is still so employed, as a project co-ordinator/manager. The respondent is... More
Plaintiff issued summons against the defendantsclaiming payment of €9 270 as fees due under a consulting contract, interest thereon at the prescribed rate, collection commission and costs on the legal practitioner and client scale. More
This is an application for rescission of default judgment brought in terms of Order 9 rule 63 of the High Court Rules 1971. The relief sought is that:
1. Judgment in case HC 1805/12 entered against applicant on 28 March 2012 be and is hereby rescinded.
2. Applicant is granted leave to supply further particulars requested by first and second respondents under case HC 11517/11 within five (5) days of the date of the granting of this order.
3. First and second respondents pay costs of suit on a legal practitioner client scale if opposed to the application. More
