This is an application for leave to appeal against the decision of this court that was handed down on 18 December 2015. This court upheld the award by Honourable Arbitrator S Mugumisi dated 12 February 2012. More
This is an application for condonation of late filing of an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court and extension of time within which to file an application for leave to appeal a decision of this court to the Supreme Court. More
A brief summary of the facts is as follows. The present application follows the earlier appeal noted by the applicant which, on 3 June 2021, was struck from the roll for want of compliance with the rules.
On 20 June 2019, the first respondent issued Summons against the applicant, second and third respondents claiming damages for assault, unlawful arrest and illegal impounding of the motor vehicle in the sum of US$ 9 556. The first respondent’s averred in the summons thatPolice Officers from the applicant and second respondent impounded his vehicle on 13 November 2018. The Police Officers also assaulted... More
The adage that the law does not help the sluggard finds expression in the operation of the provisions of the Prescription Act [Chapter 8:11] which provides for the prescription of a debt if no action to claim the same is done within a period of three years in the absence of interruption. Such interruption can be through an express or tacit acknowledgment of liability by a debtor in which case prescription shall start running again from the date on which the interruption commenced. This court finds that this is the situation that the plaintiff finds itself in, and has not... More
The factual background of this matter is largely common cause. Sometime in 1992 the applicant and the first respondent entered into an agreement in terms of which the applicant sold to the first respondent a piece of land situate in the District of Salisbury called Stand 14773 Harare Township of Salisbury Township Lands measuring 1 4221 hectares (the property). In terms of clause 7 of the agreement the first respondent was to develop the stand by commencing erecting buildings within six months from the date of infrastructure servicing and complete same within twelve months from such date. Pursuant to the... More
This is an application which is being made in terms of Article 34 (2) (b) (ii) of the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15] to set aside the arbitral award which was awarded in favour of the first respondent on 28 July 2017. The applicant is the City of Harare a body corporate incorporated in terms of the Urban Councils Act [Chapter 29:15]. The first respondent Augur Investments OU is a peregrinus incorporated in Mauritius. The second respondent is the Minister of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing (the Minister) whilst the third respondent is Honourable Retired Justice Mtshiya cited in... More
This opposed application was argued on the 9th February, 2017 and the court reserved judgment then. While preparing the judgment it occurred to me that none of the counsels had raised an issue as to whether respondents 4 – 22 were properly before the court as none of them had filed any opposing affidavits or any supporting affidavit making common cause with either second or third Respondents who had purported to be authorised to file opposition on their behalf. This aspect was so pertinent and could not be determined without giving the parties an opportunity to present argument on it.... More
MUNGWARI J: On 25 November 2020 in case number HC 5833/20 MUSHORE J granted an order in favour of the respondents in this application. The order was obtained in default of the applicant. Aggrieved by the turn of events, the applicant on 16 June 2022 filed an application seeking the rescission of that judgment. A simple calculation of the time lag between the date when the judgment was issued and the time when the application for rescission of the judgment was filed shows a delay of one and a half years. The default judgment in issue reads as follows: More
This is an appeal against part of a judgment handed down at Harare Magistrates Court on the 9th of April 2021 in case number 3025/20.
FACTS
Appellant sued for the eviction of the Respondent from premises known as number 616 Muonde Road, Mufakose, Harare (the premises) in the lower court. The premises were once leased to one Alina Matenga also known as ElinaElina but the lease was cancelled. Respondent and his mother, Asina Black (now deceased) were in occupation of the premises illegally.Appellant based its suit on the fact that there was no lease agreement between it and the Respondent.... More
This is an application for the upliftment of the bar which came into operation following the failure by the applicant to enter appearance to defend within the time stipulated in the Rules of Court. The applicant herein is the defendant while the respondent is the plaintiff in Case Number HC 9909/11 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the main action’). More
The plaintiff issued summons against the defendants on 28 June 2017 claiming payment of $54 814, 85 being unpaid rates due to plaintiff by defendant in respect of Rates Account Number 211000882000008, interest at 10% per annum fromthe date of service of summons to the date of payment and costs of suit. More
We heard the above appeal on 19 September 2023 and granted it on the following terms:
1. The appeal succeeds with costs.
2. The order of the court a quo be and is hereby set aside and is substituted with the following order:
a. That the plaintiff’s claim for eviction is hereby upheld
b. That the defendant and all those claiming occupation through him are hereby ordered to give vacant possession to plaintiff, failing which they are to be evicted from Shop Number 16, Samora Machel Parkade, Harare, being plaintiff’s premises. More
The plaintiff sued the defendant for payment of the sum of $541 217.84 being outstanding balance, as at 2 December 2013, on defendant’s account for the supply of treated water. Plaintiff also sought interest on the above amount at the prescribed rate, costs of suit and collection commission. On the date of hearing plaintiff amended the figure claimed to $528 614.85 More
The applicant sought relief in terms of r 449 for the correction of an order granted by this court after a pre- trial conference between the parties. It was alleged that the issued order incorrectly captured the case number and the second, third and fourth respondents were not cited. The application was opposed. The respondents’ opposing affidavits dedicated most of the response to the background of the matter. There was no discernible basis for opposing the application, in fact there was a veiled concession to the granting of the order sought. More
TAKUVA J: This is a court application for a declaratur in terms of s14 of the High Court Act Chapter 7:06. The applicant is a local authority duly instituted in terms of the Urban Council’s Act (Chapter 29:15) which is the authority responsible for the management of the City of Kwekwe.
The respondent is a body corporate duly established in terms of the Zimbabwe National Water Authority Act [Chapter 20:25].
On 15 February 2013, the parties entered into an agreement for the provision of water to applicant’s rate payers. In terms of that agreement, the applicant is the consumer while... More
