Electronic Court judgements

Browse Court Judgements by court

This court is generally reluctant to interfere with unterminated proceedings in the inferior courts. However, as shall be demonstrated in this case, certain exceptions warrant the intervention of this court guided by the interests of justice principle. The applicant approached this court seeking the review of the decision of the first respondent. The first respondent dismissed the application for discharge at the close of the State case which was lodged by the applicant. More precisely, the applicant prays for the following relief: “1. The decision of the first respondent dismissing the applicant’s Application for Discharge at the Close of The... More

The parties herein were formerly husband and wife. Two minor children were born from the union, namely Anthony Christie Pissas (born 8th March 1994) and Dean Alexander Pissas (born 13th October 1995). On 2 November 2006 this Honourable Court granted a decree of divorce in favour of the respondent herein. The respondent was awarded custody of the minor children. Prior to the decree of divorce being granted the parties had entered into a Consent Paper in terms of which other ancillary relief was provided for. More

This is an appeal against the sentence imposed upon the appellant following his conviction on three counts of robbery as defined in s 126 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [ Chapter 9:23], one count of attempted robbery as defined in s 189 (I) (a) and (b) as read with s 126 of the same Act,one count of attempted rape as defined in s 65 as read with s 189 of the same Act, and one count of theft as defined in s 113 of the Act. More

This is a court application for review of criminal proceedings in terms of section 26 and 27 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7.06]. More

The first and second applicants share certain things in common. They seek the same relief against the first and second respondents. They were both shot at and injured by members of the Zimbabwe Republic Police on 22 February 2018. They both instituted claims for general and special damages before this court under HC 11467/18 and HC 11469/18 respectively. In their defence, the respondents herein raised the defence of prescription as part of their plea to the plaintiffs’ claims. More