: The plaintiff and defendant herein are brothers. The plaintiff instituted summons in 2016 claiming US$14 731-00 (fourteen thousand seven hundred and thirty one dollars) arising from outstanding dividends which were due and payable from October 2012, interest and costs. The defendant denies liability on the basis that the claim has prescribed and in any case no dividend is payable to the plaintiff as none was declared by the board of directors. More
The plaintiff’s claim is for damages for malicious arrest and detention allegedly arising from the second defendant’s action of laying a charge of theft against the plaintiff at Marimba Police Station. More
The first plaintiff’s claim as amended is for the replacement cost of his motor vehicle, being a 1996 model Mitsubishi Canter truck imported from Japan in the amount of USD 7000 and ZAR 58 043,99 for freight and duty charges. More
This matter was filed consequent upon my judgment involving the same parties as herein cited which I delivered referenced HH 530-22 in case no. HC 1540/21 on 3 August 2022. The Minister of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing had been a party in case no. HC 1540/21. However, no relief was claimed from him and he is not cited in the current proceedings. Just to recap, in case no. HC 5140/21, the applicants had pursuant to filing the said application, been granted under case no. HC 9690/21 by MUNANGATI-MANONGWA J, on 1 April 2021 an order of condonation... More
The applicants are owners of immovable properties in the splush suburb of Mount Pleasant Heights, Harare. The area of Mount Pleasant Heights in which their properties are situate is called Bannockburn. To that end they own properties in Bannockburn as follows:
(a) 1st and 10th applicant – stand 950.
(b) 2nd applicant –Stand 947
(c) 3rd applicant – Stand 949
(d) 4th applicant – Stand 939
(e) 5th applicant – Stand 931
(f) 6th applicant – Stand 913
(g) 7th and 9th applicant – Stand 945
(h) 8th applicant – not stated More
The plaintiff herein claims the sum of US$150,000 as damages for malicious misconduct allegations brought against him by the defendant in April 2008. The defendant denies any malice or illegality on its part. More
1. This is an urgent application wherein initially the applicant sought a provisional order. At the hearing the court mero motu raised the issue whether this court has the jurisdiction and the competence to pronounce on the validity or lack thereof of a Supreme Court order. On reflection, Mr Dube counsel for the applicant conceded that this application has no merit and withdrew it tendering payment of costs on a party and party scale. Counsel conceded that this court has neither competence nor jurisdiction to pronounce on the validity or otherwise of an order of the Supreme Court. First respondent... More
The applicant seeks the following order -
“1…………..
2. The 1st Respondent is hereby declared and consequently confirmed as a substantive
Divisional Intelligence Officer in the employ of the 2nd Respondent with effect from
1st July 2013.
3. Consequently, Respondents jointly and severally are ordered to reflect the records
of the Applicant as such as per paragraph 1 of this order, including updating and
paying entitlements applicable to the position of Divisional Intelligence Officer
effective 1st of July 2013.
4. The Respondents pay costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale jointly and
severally the one paying the... More
The appellant was convicted by the Regional Court sitting at Harare on a charge of criminal abuse of duty as a public officer as defined in s 174(1)(a) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23].
He was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment of which 1 year imprisonment was wholly suspended for 4 years on condition he does not within that period commit an offence involving corruption or abuse of office for which upon conviction he is sentenced to imprisonment without the option of a fine.
The facts found proved were that on dates unknown to the prosecutor... More
At the beginning of the hearing I dismissed the points in limine raised by both parties and stated that the reasons would be given in the main judgment. I will therefore proceed to deal with the points in limine in the order they were raised. More
This is an appeal against refusal of bail pending trial by a magistrate. The appeal is made in terms of sections 121 (b) and 121 (2) (b) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act (Chapter 9:07) (the Act).
The facts
The Appellant, a self confessed cross border transporter who has been frequenting South Africa for the past ten (10) years was charged with contravening section 60A (3) (a) (b) of the Electricity Act (Chapter 13:19). The section states,
“Any person who without lawful cause, the proof whereof shall lie on him or her, receives or takes into possession of any... More
On 6 June 2019 the plaintiff initiated court proceedings by issuing summons against Mt Selinda High School and its responsible church authority, United Church of Christ in Zimbabwe as co-defendant claiming payment of US$29 384-00, interest at the prescribed rate and costs of suit on an attorney-client scale. More
The appellant is a non-profit, non governmental organisation which provides humanitarian relief and it also implements fixed duration rural development projects. More
