This matter was set down as an application for leave to appeal. Before the merits of the application could be entertained two points in limine were raised by the respondent. It is only these two points which are the subject of this judgement. More
On the 21st of September 2022, I granted an extempore judgment dismissing applicant’s claim on the basis of one of the points limine that had been raised. On the 14th of December ,2022 whilst on official vacation, the applicant’s legal practitioner wrote to the Registrar of this court requesting for the written judgment. This is the judgment.
The common cause facts are that, Applicant is a registered Residence Association that represents owners of a block of flats called Zimbabwe Court, situate at stand 408 Avondale West of subdivision A of lot 22 of Block d of Avondale, Salisbury also known... More
Zimbabwe Cover Legal Aid Trust, a body corporate duly registered as such in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe issued summons against the defendant (excipient) one Claudious Taunzwasure Chirochangu claiming a payment of the sum of US$ 41 580.00, payment of interest on the capital sum at the rate of 20% per month calculated from the 24th November 2014 to date of full payment. In the alternative, and in the event of the defendant failing to pay the capital sum and interest within time to be fixed by this Honourable Court, an order declaring the sale of the property being... More
This is an application for the urgent stay of arbitral award which was issued in favor of the 1st Respondent and registered with the High Court followed by attempted execution by the 2nd Respondent.
Facts of the case are that the 1st Respondent hereinafter referred to as the employee found himself before arbitration on a claim which he had against the Applicant hereinafter referred to as the employer. The Arbitrator made an order in favour of the employee. Armed with that order, the employee registered the same with the High Court. After the registration of the award, execution of the... More
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court dismissed the application stating that reasons would follow. These are they:-
This matter has endured so many quick and false starts in its litigation career. Applicant and Respondent found themselves before an Arbitrator after the conciliation process failed. The Arbitrator found in favour of Respondent and awarded him USD 103 203.38 and ZWD 15 818 201 352.75 as arrear commission. Respondent thereafter lodged an application with the High Court for registration of the award. This was granted. Apparently Applicant did not attend those proceedings despite proper service. Applicant thereafter approached this Court... More
On 11 October 2012 the first respondent obtained a court order in HC 5475/09 against the applicant to the following effect.
“It is ordered that:
1. The award in the arbitration matter of Mr. Muzamhindo and Zimbabwe Cricket Union held before the Honourable J.T. Mawire dated 17 July 2009 be and is hereby registered as an order of the High Court of Zimbabwe in the following terms:-
1.1 Respondent shall pay to the applicant the sum of US$103 208.38 as arrear commission.
1.2 Respondent shall bear costs of this application.” More
The applicants have jointly approached this court for an order in the following terms:
1. That the confirmation of the liquidation and distribution account by the third respondent in respect of Shagelok Chemicals (Private) Limited (in liquidation) be and is hereby set aside.
2. That the third respondent be and is hereby directed to re-open the account referred to above for inspection for a period of 14 days with effect from the date of judgment in this matter. More
At the hearing of this matter the plaintiff bank was in default. Mr Biti, for the defendant, sought and was granted leave to argue the matter on the merits. Judgment on the merits of the case was granted in favour of the defendant with costs. I indicated that my reasons for judgment would follow. More
The plaintiff, the Zimbabwe Development Bank, hereinafter referred to as the bank, issued summons out of this court on 17 December 2004 seeking, against the three defendants jointly and severally, the one paying the others to be absolved, payment of $587 612 879.86 and interest thereon capitalized monthly at 1% per day calculated from the date of issue of summons to the date of full payment and costs of suit on a legal practitioner scale and collection commission as provided for under the Law Society of Zimbabwe By-laws 1982. On 6 January 2005, the defendants entered appearance in which they... More
On the 27th of January 2003, the plaintiff filed summons claiming payment in the sum of US$ 715,185.66, together with interest and costs on the higher scale. The defences proffered by the defendants are that the plaintiff is not entitled to judgement in United States dollars (US$) and that, in any event, they have already tendered payment in the Zimbabwe dollar ((ZW$) equivalent. More
The applicant is a political party registered in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe. It sought to participate in the 2013 harmonised elections. The Constitutional Court had, in Mawarire v Mugabe N.O. and Others CCZ 1/13, held that elections must be held before 31 July 2013 More
Applicants seek for the placement of the first respondent under corporate rescue in terms of s121 (a) financially distressed, it having failed to pay accounts in terms of its obligations, and that justice and equity requires that first respondent be resuscitated or rescued given that there are reasonable prospects for such rescue. (i) (ii) (iii) of the Insolvency Act (Chapter 6:07) as read with s124 and 131, on the grounds that it is
First respondent opposes the application on the basis that it is not in financial distress, it having paid off all its creditors, and its board is now... More
Applicant applied to this Court for the reinstatement of a abandoned matter i.e. LC/H/LRA/826/18. At the onset of oral argument 2nd Respondent raised a 2 points in limine which Applicant opposed. More
The application before me is a rei vindication action brought by the applicant against the respondent. The applicant desires an order from this court ordering the respondentto return two motor vehicles to it, viz a Nissan Sunny FB 14 1996 model bearing registration No. 829 – 998 W and a Nissan Sunny HB 12, bearing registration Number 505 – 933 B.
Two notable positions or defences come out of the respondent’s opposing affidavit and poorly drafted heads of argument. The respondent has argued that this court does not have the jurisdiction to meddle itself in labour-related disputes as he perceives... More
