This is an application for bail pending appeal. The applicant was arraigned before the Regional Magistrate’s Court, sitting in Beitbridge, on a charge of robbery in contravention section 126 of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. The allegations against him are briefly as follows: in that on the 19 July 2020, applicant used violence or threats of immediate violence and forcibly took cash amounting to ZAR 14 000.00; a Huwei Y9 blue in colour IMEI number 860673040578786; a Sonny Xperia black in colour IMEI numbers 352562100128050 / 357751107509595, being the property of Kurureni Mukwena. Applicant pleaded not... More
The appellant was convicted at Mutare for contravening s 93 (1) (b) that is kidnapping or unlawful detention, it being alleged that on Saturday, 6 August 2019 at Zuva Service Station, near Mutare Polytechnic, Mutare, the appellant lifted and carried Pressly Tafara Mubaiwa, a juvenile, on shoulders and attempted to put him in the boot of a Toyota Runx. He had pleaded not guilty and he was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment. 6 months imprisonment was suspended for 5 years on the usual conditions of future good behaviour. More
The applicants approached this court on a certificate of urgency seeking the stay of execution of a judgement granted by consent pending an application they made in terms of rule 449(1) (b) of the High Court rules 1971. More
The records of proceedings in the above matters were placed before me on review in terms of s 57 of the magistrates court Act, [Chapter 7:10]. In all the record of proceedings, the accused persons appeared before the same magistrate for the province of Mashonaland, viz, T.A. Chamisa Esquire. The learned magistrate aforesaid disposed of each of the matters by way of trial of the accused upon the guilty plea procedure. The guilty plea procedure is provided for in terms of sections 271(2)(a) and 271(2)(b) of the Criminal
Procedure & Evidence Act, [Chapter 9:07]. In terms of distinction between the... More
This is an appeal against conviction on a charge of contravening s 52(2)(a) of the Road Traffic Act [Chapter 13:11] (Negligent driving). The appeal against sentence was abandoned at the hearing.
The appeal is opposed by the respondent. More
The plaintiff issued out summons claiming outstanding rentals, holding over damages and monies outstanding from electricity consumption by its tenants. The brief background to his matter is as follows. The parties entered into a verbal lease in terms of which the defendant leased stand 17018 Graniteside, Harare, a factory from the plaintiff for the period 2003 to May 2014 More
The applicants approached this court seeking an order in the following terms:
“1. That respondent is interdicted from supplying the following components produced from molds or patterns furnished by 1st applicant to respondent to any person other than 1st applicant or a company that he represents;-
Feeder Chamber
Chamber Compression
Head
Single Flight Worms
Double Flight Worms
Steam Locks
Bearing Housings
Clamp Halves
Drive Pullies”
The background to the matter is that the respondent is in the business of producing castings which it sells to customers including the applicant. More
The applicant has approached this court on an urgent basis seeking what is in essence spoliatory relief, restoration to a portion of the respondent’s hotel known as Rainbow Towers Hotel and Conference Centre situated at the second mezzanine floor of the prestigious hotel. The applicant also seeks an order allowing it to continue operations at that portion of the hotel without interference and to be allowed free access to its tools, material and machinery which it placed at that location and related relief. More
This was an appeal from a decision of the magistrate’s court. We dismissed it soon after argument and gave reasons ex tempore. The appellant has now sought written reasons. More
This is an application for summary judgment in terms of rule 64 which provides:
“(1) Where the defendant has entered appearance to a summons, the plaintiff may, at any time before a pre-trial conference is held, make a court application in terms of this rule for the court to enter summary judgment for what is claimed in the summons and costs. More
In this urgent chamber application the applicant seeks an interim relief to interdict the first respondent from continuing with execution pending the finalization of the instant case. More
MAKONESE J: This is an urgent chamber application for an interdict. The draft order is in the following terms:
“INTERIM RELIEF
1. That the respondents be and are hereby interdicted from carrying out mining activities at True Double Investments Mine at the exclusion of 1st and 2nd applicants and/or denying the applicants the right to benefit from the activities of the 2nd respondent being carried out at the mining site pending the return date.
2. That there be no order as to costs if the application is unopposed.
TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
3. That the 1st respondent and anyone... More
The plaintiff issued out summons claiming adultery damages against the defendant who she alleges was engaged in an adulterous relationship with her husband, one Jabulani Tawanda Chikore since July 2020. They were married on 21 August 1998 in terms of the then Marriage Act [Chapter 5 :11] now the Marriages Act [Chapter 5:17]. There is one minor child born of the marriage. It is alleged that the plaintiff has suffered personal injury or contumelia and loss of her spouse’s consortium. The inclusive amount of damages claimed is USD 50 000.00 being USD 25 000.00 a piece. More
This is an application supposedly for a mandatory interdict. It is accompanied by a certificate of urgency in ostensible compliance with Order 32 r 241 of the High Court rules. I have had to determine the matter on the papers without hearing oral argument. The application is against a background of a spike in the spread of the deadly corona virus and a rise in fatalities from covid-19 related complications. On 2 January 2021, in response to that spike, the Government, as did many others around the world, ordered a return to a high level lockdown which is characterised by... More
The appellant was on 30 December 2020 denied bail pending trial by the provincial magistrate sitting at Harare. The appellant had appeared before the magistrate on a charge of incitement to participate in a gathering with intent to promote public violence, breach of peace or bigotry as defined in s 187 (1) (a) as read with s 37 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]. In the atternative, the appellant was charged “with incitement of gathering of more than fifty people without permission as defined in s 187 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification... More
