In this matter plaintiff sued first and second defendants for cancelation of a lease agreement on account of breach, ejectment of the first defendant and all those claiming occupation through first defendant from plaintiff’s premises, payment of the sum of US$9 000-00 representing rent arrears as at the time of breach and holding over damages at the rate of US$1500-00 per month from 1 April 2015 to date of ejectment and 5% per annum interest from the due date of payment.
First defendant was sued in his personal capacity as the principal debtor he having been the tenant in terms... More
The abovementioned four matters were referred to me for dealingat one and the same time. Ongoing through the records which relate to each of them, I remained alive to the fact that, whilst the applicants are different and have, accordingly, filed their respective applications with the court separately, everything else which relates to each of the four cases is substantially one and the same thing. More
Plaintiff issued summons against the defendants for the recovery of a debt in the sum USD81 881.42 which it claims is due and owing to it. Plaintiff prayed for an order in the following terms:-
i) Judgment in the sum of US$81 881.42 being the capital sum owing under a Trade Credit Facility Agreement between plaintiff and first defendant dated 13 January 2011 for goods and commodities supplied and delivered at the instance and specific request of the first defendant, the sum of which has remained due despite due and proper demand.
ii) An order declaring specially executable, the immovable... More
On the day of hearing this matter, I issued an order in the following terms:
“1. The decision of the 2nd Respondent of dismissing the Applicants’ application for recusal in Case No. CRB 12586/15 be and is hereby set aside.
2. That the proceedings in case number CRB 12586/15 commence de novo before another Magistrate.
3. That there be no order as to costs.” More
The applicants’ journey to justice is long and arduous. Their case passed through the hands of not less than six (6) judges of this court. I am the seventh in the queue of judges. As I write this judgment, the case is not coming to finality soon. I am dealing with an interlocutory matter. Two or more judges may deal with the rest of the case. When they will do so will depend on the outcome of this judgment. More
