On 1 November 2018 the applicant’s three motor vehicles, a Mercedes Benz AEK 1985, a Mazda T3500 ABG 8923 and a Vintage Dodge ACB 8557 were attached by the first respondent, the Sheriff and were due to be removed on 7 November 2018. This prompted the applicant to file the present urgent chamber application for stay of execution on the ground that the attachment which was done by the Sheriff is null and void because he has already paid all his dues to the second respondent, Maparahwe Properties (Pvt) Ltd and the third respondent, Norton Town Council. More
The applicant and one Phillip Chigumira, who is now deceased, were business partners with equal shareholding of 50% each in an entity called Maurizim Investments (Pvt) Ltd (hereinafter referred to as Maurizim or the company). They acquired an immovable property called Stand 10245 measuring 2383 square metres (the property). The property was registered in the name of the company. Following the demise of the late Phillip Chigumira in 2011, his estate was registered with the second respondent under DR 1265/11. The first respondent was appointed the Executor Dative. More
This an urgent chamber application for stay of execution of the judgment granted in case number HC 4457/19. The interim relief is being sought pending determination of an application for joinder, which the applicant proposes to file within five days from the date of the provisional order. On the return date the applicant seeks an order for the permanent stay of execution of the order referred to above. More
The bulkiness of this application gives the impression that the matter before me is complicated and involved yet it is a straight-forward application in which the applicant applies for relief as set out in the draft order as follows:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The first respondent’s decision made on the 13th of October, 2021 in dismissing the application for a postponement and ordering the hearing to proceed in the absence of applicant’s legal practitioners be and is hereby set aside.
2. The proceedings in State v Tendai Laxton BitiCRB HreP 11362/20 pending first (sic) before first respondent be and... More
The applicants approached this Court seeking that its late filing and setting down of the applicant’s exception be condoned and that the applicants be given leave to set down their exception within 10 days from the date of this judgment. The respondent a self-actor opposed the application but is not in attendance despite service of the notice of set down at his chosen address. Nonetheless, the court has decided to determine the matter on merits and the applicants’ legal practitioner made submissions and urged the court to exercise its discretion and grant the order sought. More
