Electronic Court judgements

Browse Court Judgements by court

This appeal is solely based on the quesstion of special circumstances. More

The following are the reasons informing the decision of the judgment I delivered ex tempore on 22 March, 2022. The reasons are being provided at the request of the respondents. The dispute primarily related to the right to occupy a certain piece of land referred to as plot 70 Chatsworth estate, Gutu which was allocated by means of a “certificate of occupation” issued by the Ministry of Lands and Rural resettlement to one Simon Chirume. The latter has since passed on leaving behind the 1st applicant as his surviving spouse. The three respondents are Simon Chirume’s children, all of whom... More

The applicant seeks the following relief:- TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be confirmed in the following terms: 1. The provisional order granted on the ......................day of ......................... be and is hereby confirmed. 2. That the 1st and 2nd respondent be and hereby declared illegal miners within the coordinates, A 0792091/7731340 – B 0792090/7731138 – C 0791944/7731090 – D 0791730/7731340 cited in the attached Annexure ‘A’. 3. The 1st and 2nd respondents be and hereby evicted from a mine situated within the coordinates A 0792091/7731340 –... More

This is an application for an interdict wherein the applicants seek in the main an order barring the 1st respondent from continuing with their mineral prospecting activities on a certain piece of land situate in the Chivi communal lands. The four applicants are all parents or guardians of leaners at two schools (Danhamombe Secondary school and St Simon Zhara primary school) on whose premises part of the prospecting is taking place. I briefly pause here to observe that the parties used the term "exploration" to refer to the 1st respondent’s prospecting activities. More

These were three opposed applications heard as one case. The globular relief sought was just about the same. Some facts differed here and there. Counsel agreed this was not in any material respects. They therefore agreed it would be practical for the cases to be combined. More