Welcome to Midlands State University Library

Court Judgements



Browse Court Judgements by court
The history of mental illness runs deep in Learnmore Michael (the accused)’s family. His mother lives with mental illness. He has a sister who lives with the same condition whilst another of his sisters committed suicide. She was driven into it by a mental health problem. As will be illustrated later in this judgment, there is evidence that the accused may have been mentally ill at the time he committed this murder. It may not be possible to apportion blame on him for his actions. More

Vevhu approached this court on an urgent basis in terms of rule 40 of the Commercial Court Rules SI 123-20. It sought a provisional order, pending arbitration, interdicting Operation Nehemiah from carrying out certain civil works on a tract of land known as Lot 12 of Spitzkop. This parcel of virgin land (“Lot 12”), lies due west of Harare in the rural district of Zvimba. More

On 21 November 2023, applicant unsuccessfully moved to have this matter heard on an urgent basis. On 23 November 2023, I handed down the reasons, under judgment number HH 628-23, for deferring the matter to the ordinary roll. The matter was, in due course, set down on the normal roll and argued on the merits on 18 January 2024. Herewith the judgment. More

This is an urgent chamber application for an interdict. What can be gathered from the papers filed is the following. The applicant is the registered owner of mining claims held under claim numbers 47323, 47324, 47325, 47326 and 47327 which were issued by the Ministry of Mines and Mining Development in terms of the Mines and Minerals Act [Chapter 21:05] in May 2020. On 26 August 2020 the respondent was issued with a mining certificate under Shamva ‘X’ mine, registration number 47622 which mining claim falls on an area covered by the applicant’s mining claims. This resulted in a dispute... More

The applicant seeks recognition and registration of an arbitral award granted in its favour by an arbitrator. The parties entered into an agreement whereby the respondent would lease the applicant’s service station in Rusape for purposes of selling its fuel and petroleum products. The respondent operates several such service stations countrywide. [2] A dispute arose between the parties as to when the lease agreement was set to expire. This was after the applicant wrote to respondent advising it of its intention to repossess the premises. Whether the respondent ought to have vacated the premises on the date that applicant argues... More