This is an application for condonation and extension of time within which to note an appeal made in terms of r 39 (4) as read with r 43 (3) of the Supreme Court, 2018. This matter was set down for a virtual hearing on 7 March 2024. Although the applicant had filed heads of argument, on the date and time of the hearing, she did not connect onto the IECMS system. Soon after the session started the IECMS system had a partial connectivity breakdown. While it was possible to see the party before me the sound was mute and there... More
The applicant approached this court seeking an order in the following terms:
“IT IS BE AND HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. That condonation of the late application for leave to appeal for case number HC1788/15 be and is hereby granted.
2. That Applicant shall lodge her leave to appeal to the Supreme Court within 7 days of the granting of this order.
3. There be no order as to costs.” More
This matter was before me on the unopposed motion roll on 30 June 2021. The plaintiff applied for default judgment against the first and second defendants for payment of USD$500 000 as damages for “shock, non-patrimonial damages, post traumatic disorder, pain and suffering.” The plaintiff also claimed interest from the date of the arbitral award dated 28 March 2014 in an arbitration case between the plaintiff and the second respondent. Lastly plaintiff prayed for costs of suit. The plaintiff in casu applied for default judgment on the basis as stated by her, that the defendants failed to enter appearance to... More
The applicant sued one Vincent Ncube and the respondent through the urgent chamber book. She did so under HC 7310/18. The order which the court granted to her on 9 August 2018 reads:
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this honourable court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. That respondents be and are hereby ordered not to interfere with the applicant’s control and occupation and possession of 126 Edgemore Road, Park Meadowlands, Hatfield, Harare.
2. The first respondent pays the costs of suit.
INTERIM RELIEF GRANTED
That pending determination... More
The applicant instituted the instant application seeking an order interdicting the second respondent or any person acting on his behalf or in furtherance of his interests from interfering with the applicant’s occupation of the property described in the papers as 126 Edgmore Road, Park Meadowlands, Hatfield, Harare. More
This is an urgent court application in which the applicant seeks the following relief:
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That the First Respondent shows cause why a final order should not be granted in the following terms:
1. The Application be and is hereby granted
2. The Execution of the Default Judgment granted on the 21st of June; 2022 under Case No MC 39520/16 against the Applicant be and is hereby stayed pending the determination of the Application for Rescission of Default Judgment under Case No SC 237/22
3. There shall be no order to costs More
: The plaintiff issued summons on 10 March 2008 claiming from the defendant adultery damages in the sum of ZW$400 billion, being a sum of Z$200 billion for contumelia and a sum of Z$200 billion for loss of consortium. The basis of the claim was that the defendant committed adultery with her husband Stanley Chiwandamira from 1981 to the date of summons. As a result of the adultery, the plaintiff lost the love, affection, society and companionship and services of her husband. She also suffered pain and indignity during that period at the hands of the defendant. Her husband has,... More
These matters were referred to me in chambers and as the parties were the same and the issues from the matters identical I decided to hear them together. More
The plaintiff company, Rieton Investments (Private) Limited deals in the supply of horticultural products. The defendants, who were formerly directors in Southern Flowers (Pvt) Ltd, are being sued in their personal capacities by the plaintiff. The plaintiff is claiming payment of the sum of US$113,416-12 for goods it sold and delivered to Southern Flowers. The plaintiff’s claim against the defendants is predicated upon s 318 of the Companies Act [Chapter 24:03] which provides that company directors can be sued in their personal capacities for damages arising from the fraudulent, reckless and/or grossly negligent conduct in the carrying on of a... More
This is an appeal against conviction and sentence. The appeal was heard on 10 January 2024 and it was dismissed it in its entirety in an ex tempore judgment.The appellant pleaded not guilty. In his defence he explained that he was not denying the charge but this was a fight between him and the complainant. After hearing evidence from three state witnesses the court a quo dismissed the appellant’s story and was satisfied the witnesses were credible. There was no fight but the complainant was assaulted with unknown weapons and bricks in an attempt to rob him. The savage attack... More
On 12 November 2022 the appellant hired the respondent as a bursar. They signed a contract of employment. It was a fixed term contract which was to expire on 31December 2024. On 7 August 2023 the appellant terminated the contract of employment in terms of clause 9.2 of the contract through a letter More
On 20 December 2007, the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant claiming the sum of $87, 501, 810 -94 being the value of certain goods that were stolen after the plaintiff had placed them in storage with the defendant. The claim was resisted primarily on the basis that the defendant was not negligent in any respect leading to the loss of the goods. In particular, it was the defendant’s case that the parties had specifically agreed that the defendant would not be liable for any loss or damage suffered by the plaintiff howsoever and form whatever cause arising even if... More
Appellant was employed by the respondent. He is alleged to have stolen goods from the employer. He was brought before a Disciplinary Committee which found him guilty and recommended his dismissal. The appellant appealed to the NEC for the Commercial Sectors Mashonaland Local Joint Committee which committee confirmed the respondent’s decision. A further appeal to the Negotiating Committee did not yield the desired result. Appellant has thus approached this court for relief. More
