This appeal is against the decision of the High Court of Zimbabwe handed down on 14 November 2018 upholding a preliminary point taken by the respondent that the appellant, who was the applicant in those proceedings, had no locus standi to institute legal proceedings against the respondent. At the centre of the dispute between the parties was the question whether the appellant was entitled to sue the respondent on the basis of the stipulatio alteri doctrine. More
The full facts of this matter are set out in the judgment of this court, per MUREMBA J, under case number HH 247-18 commencing at page 7 thereof.
In that matter, an application for rescission of default judgment, the Deed of Trust was not placed before the court. More
This is an appeal against refusal of bail.
The appellant is appearing at the Regional Court in Harare (sitting as a Designated Anti-Corruption Court) charged with the crime of extortion as defined in s 134(1)(a) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] “The Code”. Also preferred against him is the alternative charge of bribery as defined in s 170 of the Code.
He is jointly charged with one Patrick Badza “Badza”. More
The applicant was in occupation of Glebe Farm, Goromonzi, measuring 669, 1865 hectares registered under Deed of Transfer No. 224/1996 (hereinafter called the farm). The farm was listed for compulsory acquisition by the respondent. The two parties entered into a deed of settlement which was later reduced into an order of the Administrative Court. In terms of that deed of settlement, the applicant was to retain 142.38 hectares of the farm and relinquish the remaining 526.81 hectares to the respondent. More
This is an application for a review of disciplinary proceedings held by the respondent’s Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority sat to inquire into misconduct allegations levelled against the applicant. The disciplinary hearing did not go into the merits of the matter. The applicant raised preliminary issues relating to the procedural fairness of the disciplinary proceedings, such as the composition of the disciplinary panel. More
The applicant herein defaulted in entering an appearance to defend the summons issued against him by the respondent in case HC2038/20. As a result a default judgmentagainst him was obtained ensued by a writ of execution, consequently giving rise to this application for rescission of judgment.
The undisputed factual run up is that the respondent is resident in the United Kingdom. Through her legal practitioner, one Innocent Taruvinga,entered into two separate loan agreements with the applicant. In the first one,executed on 3 July, 2020, applicant was advanced the sum of forty-five thousand (US$ 45 000, 00). Within a space of... More
This is an application for summary judgment in terms of rule 64 which reads:
“(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
This was an application for bail pending appeal in which this court, after perusing the application and hearing counsel, this court was of the considered view that bail pending appeal be not granted as there were no prospects of success on appeal. More
This matter took unduly long to conclude. It was initially intercepted by a robustly contested point in limine challenging the court`s exercise of jurisdiction. The ensuing interlocutory arguments resulted in the decision of Matthew Rosenfeldt v The Brackenhill Trust & 4 Ors HH 348-23. That matter dealt extensively with the issue of definition of a commercial dispute. More
The procedural overburden which suffocated resuscitation of distressed companies under Zimbabwe`s old Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:04] and Companies Act [ Chapter 24:03] was articulated by MALABA CJ in Metallon Gold Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd & 3 Ors v Shatirwa Investments (Pvt) Ltd & 3 Ors SC 107-21. In the same decision, the Learned Chief Justice dwelt, with equal acuity, on the significant changes to the corporate rescue process introduced by the new Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07] . More
The applicant is seeking an order for the cancellation of the Title Deed Number 2411/2012B registered in the name of the second respondent Mallan Zorodzai Chiswa, the return of his Mercedes Benz S 350 Registration Number AAH 0097 which is held by the second respondent as well as payment of costs on an attorney and client scale against the first and second respondents. More
This is a chamber application in terms of rule 164 as read with rule 165 (1) of the High Court Rules, 1971 (Rules). It is contended that (a) applicant filed and served upon respondent a notice to make a further discovery in terms rule 162 on the 8th July 2020; (b) the respondent has not yet filed its notice of a time for inspection in terms of rule 164. Applicant seeks an order drawn in the following terms:-
1. The Respondent shall file its Notice to Inspect in terms of Rule 164 (1a) within 5 days of the service of... More
This is an application for a postponement of a trial.Even though the postponement itself was dealt with fairly comfortably by counsel, the costs occasioned by the postponement became a bone of contention. Hence this judgment.
This matter was set-down for trial for the 2nd and 3rd February 2022. The trial was set to start at 10 O’clock. Defendant was not in attendance. Adv. Dube counsel for the defendant informed the court thather brief was to apply for a postponement of the trial.The brief to Adv. Dubeto appear in court and seek a postponement was given telephonicallyby Mr Ncube of Ncube... More
This is an urgent application wherein the applicant seeks the following interim relief:
“Pending the confirmation or discharge of this order, that it shall have the effect of,
- Restraining the 1st respondent from allocating the annual quota in respect of Tsholotsho North concession area, being the area leased by the applicant from 1st respondent, to any third party and or issuing hunting permits for the same area leased by applicant.” More
The dispute in this case was over the issue of succession to the position of village head.The background information was that the plaintiff, Matyeka (correct name Mahleka) Whicho, was the last born male child in the family in question. The second defendant, Tate Whicho, was plaintiff’s elder half-brother. They were born of the same father but of different mothers. Between them was another brother who had been born of the same mother as the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed he had been duly appointed the village head in 1999 and had on three occasions received the allowances for that position but... More
