First and second respondents made a court application in the Magistrates Court, seeking an interdict to bar applicant from cutting or removing timber from a woodlot allegedly belonging to first and second respondent. Applicant averred that the woodlot is situated within its demarcated area leased to it by Forestry Commission.
The court a quo concluded that there were material disputes of fact and ordered that the matter be referred to trial and that papers filed by the parties constitute the pleadings. Applicant was dissatisfied by the magistrate’s ruling and brought this application. Applicant contends that the decision of the court... More
On 19 May 2021 after considering papers filed of record and hearing counsel we gave an extempore judgment wherein we dismissed the appeal in its entirety. We undertook to avail written reasons in due course. These are they:
The appellant was arraigned before the Magistrates Court facing a charge of attempted rape as defined in s 189(1)(a) or (b) as read with s 65(1)(b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. After a protracted trial the accused who had pleaded not guilty was convicted and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment of which 2 years imprisonment was suspended... More
In this matter the appellant lodged an appeal against the decision of the court a quo wherein the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claim and ruled in favour of the defendant. The matter was centred on whether or not there was breach of contract warranting cancellation of the agreement between the parties and thus effectively barring the plaintiff from claiming specific performance to enforce the agreement. The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal: More
On 11 February 2021 the applicant approached this court through the urgent chamber book. The respondent was duly served with the application and set down date for hearing on 12 February 2021. In compliance with the practice direction, the applicant filed the application inclusive of heads of argument, in conformity with the directive. The matter was determined on papers in chambers. The respondent was properly served but did not file any response opposing or conceding the application. I thus proceeded to entertain the unopposed application and granted the provisional order with an indication that reasons would be availed. More
The brief facts of the case are as follows. The applicant was arraigned before the magistrate court for trial before the first respondent. The allegations being that the applicant was found in possession of a live pangolin, a specially protected animal without a permit in contravention of s 45 (i) (b) as read with s 128 (i) (b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act. [Chapter 20:14]. The applicant pleaded not guilty and trial commenced. Three witness gave evidence on behalf of the state. The state thereafter closed its case and the applicant in terms of section 198 (3) of The... More
