On 13 December 2011 the plaintiff, a mining equipment supplier, issued summons out of this court seeking payment of the sum of US$325 119-65 being the invoiced cost of electrical goods that it sold and delivered to the defendant, a mining conglomerate, between 20 August 2009 and 12 December 2011, interest at the prescribed rate from 21 November 2011 and costs of suit.The claim was made up of goods worth US$ 78 485-61 delivered to Shamva Gold Mine, US$ 245 467-82 delivered to How Gold Mine, US$626-96 delivered to Redwing Gold Mine, and US$ 36 184-02 delivered to Mazowe Gold... More
On 4 June 2020 and 21 September 2020, I heard argument in relation to an application by Goldlock Industries (2003) (Pvt) Ltd (Under Liquidation) for a declaratory order and reserved judgment. The application in casu was brought by the liquidator of the applicant acting under a certificate of appointment issued by the 6th respondent (the Master of the High Court). The relief sought was couched in the following terms:
“IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. That any action or proceedings against the applicant shall not be proceeded with or commenced with effect from the date of the provisional order without the... More
Applicant applied to this Court for condonation of a belated review. The application was made in terms of Rule 22 of the Labour Court Rules, 2017. Respondents opposed the application. The pertinent parts of the founding affidavit stated that; More
This is an application for condonation for late filing of an application for review of an arbitration award against the applicant.
The award being sought to be brought on review to the Labour Court was entered on 13 January 2016.
The award being sought to be brought on review was granted in default by the arbitrator. The applicant has not sought to apply to the arbitrator to have it rescinded on showing good cause for its default.
It has sought to bring the matter on review before the Labour Court but they are out of time, hence this application for... More
This is a chamber application for discharge of an interim order granted by this court on the 16th of January 2017 under case no. HC 12931/16 interdicting the applicant and all other persons acting on his behalf from carrying mining activities within the prohibited distance from the first respondent’s permanent structures and borehole, interdicting them from threatening the first respondent or any of the first respondent’s employees as well as joining the second respondent as a party to the proceedings. Finally, the interim order gave the police details of Kadoma to enforce peace between the parties if the need arises. More
: The plaintiff and defendant were married in terms of the African Marriages Act [Cap 238, (now 5:07)] on 14 June 1989.
On 19 October 2011 that marriage was declared a nullity by this court at the instance of the plaintiff in case number HH264/11. The plaintiff had married defendant when he was already married to two other women, namely Constance Chasi and Rosaria Manjala in terms of the Marriages Act, [Cap 5:11]. In 1990 at plaintiff’s instance his marriage to Constance Chasi was annulled. He thus remained married to Rosaria and Defendant. At the time the marriage to defendant... More
The plaintiff issued summons against the defendants claiming the following.
a. The setting aside of the unlawful allocation of Stand No. 579 Arcon Township, Harare by the 2nd defendant to the 1st defendant.
b. The eviction or ejectment of the 1st defendant from Stand No. 579 Arcon Township, Harare within 7 days of the date of granting of this order.
c. The 1st defendant to be ordered to demolish the structures she erected on Stand no. 579 Arcon Township, Harare, upon her eviction, failure of which the plaintiff or the Sheriff of the High Court shall demolish the structures.
d.... More
Applicants filed a rei vindicatio claim against Respondent in respect of a motor vehicle, a Toyota Avensis registration number AFF 7889. They also sought an order authorizing the Sheriff to recover the said motor vehicle from the Respondent. Applicants also sought an order for the committal of Respondent to prison if he does not return the vehicle as ordered which committal would be until he delivers the motor vehicle or discloses its location. More
The respondent made an application for summary judgment against the appellant in the Chinhoyi Magistrates Court and obtained judgment on 28 March 2008. The notice of appeal was filed on 3 June 2008. It would appear from a perusal of the record that the learned magistrate issued an ex tempore judgment and gave his written reasons for judgment later. More
This was an application for the setting aside ofan arbitral award made by the third respondent on 6 December 2016.
The application was opposed.
At the hearing of this application this court granted the order as prayed for.
Simultaneously this court was also asked to deal with the application for the registration of the arbitral award made in Case number HC 1054/17.
This court dismissed the application for the registration of the aforesaid arbitral award in terms of Articles 35 and 36 of the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15] More
At the hearing of this matter respondent raised a point in limine which is the subject of this judgment.
Appellant noted an appeal on 9 October 2015. The notice of appeal has twenty-four pages. The grounds of appeal are in pages 19 to 24, numbering 9 with each having four or more subsections. In summary, Appellant is aggrieved by
1) failure by the Arbitrator to comply with the Supreme Court Civil Appeal NO SC 129/11 of 28 March 2014;
2) failure by the Arbitrator to comply with the Labour Court Judgment NO. LC/H/541/14 of 15 August 2014 as amended on... More
This is an appeal against part of the judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) dated 14 September 2022. The court a quo ordered the appellant to pay the second respondent the sum of $885 875.00 together with interest thereon at the prescribed rate per annum from 1 October 2010 to the date of full and final payment. It further ordered the second respondent to pay the appellant a sum of $34 454.00 together with interest thereon at the prescribed rate and holding over damages. More
The plaintiff instituted summons against the defendants as far back as 2014 seeking the eviction of the defendants from room 10 at Cutty Sark hotel (the hotel) in Kariba and holding over damages equivalent to the rental of the room. The defendants’ defence is that they derive their right to stay in the plaintiff’s property as they are owed consultancy fees by the plaintiff. The defendants raised a counterclaim for payment of outstanding fees. More
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court in which the court dismissed the appellant’s application wherein he sought to obtain an order against the respondents for contempt of court coupled with a fine of “$10 000 each per More
