There are 2 applications before me, namely an application for condonation of the late filing of an application for rescission of judgment and the application for rescission of judgment. The parties agreed that both matters be heard at the same time.
Ideally the application for rescission of judgment should not have been filed without condonation of its late filing. Filing it at the same time as the application for condonation does not cure the defect. Now that it has been filed it still cannot be considered without its late filing being condoned. Therefore a dismissal of the application for condonation... More
Upon considering the record of proceedings, heads of argument and hearing oral submissions in this appeal we upheld the appeal and made the following order that
1. The appeal hereby partially succeeds.
2. The order of the court a quo is set aside and substituted as follows:
3. The defendants’ shall pay $7 710 to the plaintiff.
4. Each party shall bear its own costs.
These are the reasons for our disposition. More
This is an application for contempt of court. The applicant seeks an order couched in the following terms:
1. The respondent be and is hereby declared to be in contempt of court of High Court cases HC 3183/17 and HC 2031/18 and accordingly respondent is ordered a sum of $10 000.00 for contempt.
2. The respondent be ordered to immediately comply with court orders HC 3183/17 and HC 2031/18 and stop interfering with the applicant’s use, occupation and possession of the Mapari / Devuli Ranch.
3. The respondent is to pay costs of suit.
The application is opposed. More
This is an application for an interdict whose relief as set out in the draft order is in the following terms:
“1. The respondent be interdicted from entering or conducting any business or hunting activity at Mapari Ranch held under Deed of Transfer 5251/92.
2. Pursuant to the order in paragraph “1” above an order that applicant engages the Zimbabwe Republic Police or/and the Sheriff/Messenger of Court to enforce the order.
3. There be no order as to costs if the relief sought is not opposed.” More
It is a simple claim by the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleges it was mandated by the defendant to find a purchaser for the defendant’s property viz 30 Southerly Road, Hillside, Harare, technically referred to as stand 8394 Salisbury Township.
The basis of plaintiff’s claim was that it introduced one Rodgers Kativu to the defendant and to the property in question. It was the plaintiff’s averment in its declaration that as a direct result of its involvement, Rodgers Kativu offered to purchase the property for $60 000 and the defendant accepted this offer and that the property was subsequently disposed of... More
The plaintiff claims against the second and third defendants a sum of US$ 16 016 being the balance outstanding in respect of goods sold and delivered to the first defendant. The original amount claimed in the summons was US$66 801-39. More
In this matter the applicant seeks the following interim relief:
“Pending the confirmation or discharge of the order it shall operate as a temporary order having the effect of interdicting the respondents from holding public gatherings or meetings in Bulawayo, or anywhere in Zimbabwe, to consider or debate Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 2”. More
Halwick Investments (Pvt) Ltd the employer is seeking leave to appeal against the order which struck off its matter from the roll. Samson Geti the employee is opposed to the grant of the leave relief. Sadly Mr Geti has not complied with the rules of court by not filing heads of argument. He is thus barred in the matter. He however seeks from the bar that the bar operating against him be uplifted. He cites administration glitches as the excuse for his non compliance. More
This is an application for leave to appeal against the decision of the labour court where it ruled that the employer’s notice of opposition was bad at law on account of the fact that there was no formal board resolution authorising the deponent to the opposing affidavit to depose to facts on behalf of the employer and that the legal practitioners for the employer had not filed an assumption of agency. More
This is an application in which applicant is seeking an order to compel first respondent to transfer to him an immovable property known as number 9 Clyde Road Famona Bulawayo. More
The applicant in this matter seeks an anticipatory interdict to preclude the termination of the salary and benefits due to him in his capacity as an employee of the respondent trade union.
The applicant was elected to the post of senior vice-president at the trade union’s congress held in the year 2000. By virtue of Article 8 of the respondent’s constitution, the applicant simultaneously became a full-time employee of the respondent.
At the last congress of the respondent, which was held in August 2005, the applicant was not re-elected to the post of vice-president. He then instituted an application in... More
The applicant seeks a declaratur. The relief sought is set out in the draft order as follows:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. That the application for Declaratur be and is hereby granted.
2. That the garnishee order issued on 8 May 2019 against the Applicant for payment in United States dollars is invalid and is hereby set aside.
3. It is specifically declared that:
3.1 the debt of US$ 29 115.12 in terms of order dated 25th October 2017 by Honourable Justice Charewa is deemed to be valued in RTGS dollars at a rate of one-to-one to the United States... More
I heard this matter on 14 September, 2020. I delivered an ex tempore judgment in which I granted the applicant’s prayer.
On 2 October, 2020 the first and second respondents wrote to the High Court registrar. They requested reasons for my decision. They indicated that they wanted to appeal my decision. The reasons are these:
The applicant purchased from one Cyprian Musarurwa (“Musarurwa”), who is now late, a certain piece of land which is situated in the district of Salisbury called stand 282 Chadcombe Township of Stand 221B Chadcombe Township (“the property”). It is 4109 square metres in extent and... More
The applicant approached this court seeking a declarator in terms of s 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06]. More particularly, the applicant prayed for the relief couched in the following manner:
“(a) The 1st Respondent did not afford a proper opportunity to the Applicant to exercise its right of first refusal in respect of the property being Stand 3188 Salisbury of Salisbury Township Lands registered under Deed of Transfer Number 7820/1989 also known as Number 1 Elsworth Avenue, Harare. More
