This matter came before me as an urgent chamber application wherein the applicants seek urgent relief as couched below:
“FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this honourable court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1) The first and second respondents are hereby interdicted from proceeding with any form of construction work at Glaudina and Kuwadzana Extension junction using a draft plan TPY/WR/1/24 until General Plan CT 2670 [SR 28532] is set aside.
2) The Draft layout plan TPY/WR/1/24 be and is hereby declared to be in direct conflict with General Plan 2670/... More
The applicant sought an order in the following terms:
“1. That the Respondent be and is hereby directed to refund Applicant within seven days of the date of this order the sum recovered from the Applicant’s Value Added Tax refund on the 20th December 2005 (sic) of $5 450 939 769.71.
2. The Respondent shall pay interest to the Applicant on the sum recovered from the Value Added Refund (sic) on the 20th December 2005 (sic) in the sum of $5 450 939 769.71 at the prescribed rate of interest from 20 December 2005 to the date of payment in... More
Judgment which I reserved in this matter has delayed owing to my reassignment to the Criminal Division soon after the hearing of the application. The follow up enquiries made by the parties as to when judgment would be ready are acknowledged and noted. The delay is deeply regretted by me and I note for the record my regret to the legal practitioners and parties of this matter for this occurrence. More
