This matter was placed before me as an application for a declaratur, in terms of s14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 7:06]. The applicants seek an order that the registered nominal shares of the 1st respondent total 24 000 (Twenty-Four thousand) and additionally costs of suit on a legal practitioner to client scale against any respondent who opposes the application. More
The background to this matter is that the applicant, a duly registered company, in terms of the law, entered into a tribute agreement with 1st respondent over several mining claims collectively known as Empress Mine in Mashava. Upon expiry of same, they entered into an agreement of sale. The first agreement was entered into on 27 March 2017 and thereafter another was signed on 7 September 2017 which allegedly met the requirements from Ministry of Mines.
The parties have been in and out of court since 2018 around the issue of Empress Mine. In case HC5673/18, the applicant alleged breach... More
In case HC 6440/18 Lugania is the applicant and seeks an order in the following terms.
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms;
Terms of Final Order Sought
(a) That 2nd respondent should not issue applicant with a resumption certificate for the applicant to resume operations at Empress Mine, following compliance by the applicant and inspection of underground workings thereon by 3rd respondent’s Mines Inspection Personnel
(b) 2nd respondent be and is hereby ordered to issue the applicant with the resumption certificate to resume underground operations in... More
: 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
