Plaintiff married defendant at Mutare in terms of the Marriage Act, [Chapter 5:11] on 30 August 1994. On 13 June 2017 he caused summons for divorce and ancillary issues to be issued. There are no minor children. Parties agree that the marriage relationship between them has irretrievably broken down to an extent that there is no hope of restoration of a normal relationship. During the duration of the marriage the parties acquired an immovable property being Stand 5216 Zimta Park, Mutare. The parties have agreed that in the event of a decree of divorce being granted by this court the... More
The applicant approached the court seeking for eviction of the respondents, its former employees. The respondents opposed the application on the basis that the applicant had not fulfilled a condition precedent to the eviction in terms of the law in particular SI 116/2014. The respondents argued that their terminal benefits were still outstanding. More
This is a civil appeal against the whole judgment of the Magistrate’s Court sitting at Mutare on 4 December 2019, where the court dismissed an application for eviction of the respondent from a communal home and farming land situated in Manyanya Village under Chief Marange in Manicaland. More
On 2 June 2020, the current two applicants were arraigned for murder where the state alleged that on 25 December 2018 and at Constance, Chitungwiza, Nyahukwe Road, Rusape, the accused each or one of them unlawfully caused the death of Carlington Rateiwa by assaulting him with fists and stabbing him with a water glass on the neck, intending to kill him or realising that there was a real risk or possibility that their conduct might cause death and continued to engage in that conduct, despite the risk or possibility resulting in injuries from which the said Carlington died. More
The first respondent, Ezekiel Masamvu, had hiS sugar packaged in Portuguese inscribed satchels seized by first appellant’s officers. Both respondents appeared at Mutasa Magistrates Court for criminal charges of being found with goods not duly accounted for, the state had abandoned the original charge of smuggling in respect of first respondent, the state also charged first respondent herein with s 4 (1) (b) (ii) as read with s 5 of the Food and Food Standards Act [Chapter 15:04], for false description of goods. More
