Electronic Court judgements

Browse Court Judgements by court

Order 10 r 64 of the High Court Rules, 1971 (r 64) provides as follows: “(1) Where the defendant has entered appearance to a summons, the plaintiff may ‘at any time before a pre-trial conference is held’ make a court application in terms of this rule for the court to enter summary judgment for what is claimed in the summons and costs” This application for summary judgment is premised on the above rule and the applicant prays for the following order:- “Summary judgment with costs be and is hereby granted in favour of the applicant against the respondent in the... More

The application for condonation for late noting of appeal is hereby dismissed. The applicant has no prospects of success on appeal. Whilst he says that the court a quo did not inform him of his legal right to legal representation, it is clear from the record of proceedings that the accused’s guilty plea to the rape charges was unequivocal. He admitted to the charges and all the essential elements of the offence. Even in mitigation it is clear that he was admitting to having committed the offences. It is my considered view that there was no substantial miscarriage of justice.... More

This is an urgent chamber application for a provisional order whose interim relief sought is couched as follows More

The Applicant’s bone of contention is that as a beneficiary of the estate of the deceased, he is not happy with the manner in which the 1st and 2nd Respondents became Directors in the 3rd to the 5th Respondents and in that on the 9th of April 2020 as 3rd -5th Respondents Directors the two made resolutions to sale immovable properties which belong to the 3rd -5th Respondents in order to clear due administration fees for the estate of the deceased. The 2 also resolved that the 3rd Respondent would sell some of its immovable properties and that the 2nd... More

The plaintiff’s issued summons against the defendant for the payment of $208 839.98 (two hundred and eight thousand eight hundred and thirty nine dollars and ninety eight cents) being retrenchment benefits, interest thereon at the prescribed rate and costs of suit on the attorney- client scale. When the matter was called for trial, defendant objected to the jurisdiction of this Court arguing that the plaintiff’s cause of action is in the form of a Labour dispute exclusively resolvable in terms section 89 of the Labour Act [Chapter 28:01]. The objection in limine was opposed by the plaintiff More