The plaintiff (applicant) issued summons against the defendants claiming payment of $101 000 being the outstanding amount on an agreement of sale for a 25tonne Volvo Conquip excavator EC250D 25L and two Powerstar VX tipper trucks, interest thereon at the prescribed rate from date of summons to date of payment in full, collection commission and legal practitioner and client costs. More
The first respondent is the holder of an offer letter for subdivision 6 of Braemar Farm in Seke District (the farm) under the jurisdiction of the Manyame Rural District Council. The farm was allocated to him on 17 November, 2009 and is 122,540 ha in extent. The farm had been gazetted on 3 September 2004 in the Government Gazette Extraordinary Vol. LXXXII, No. 72. The acquisition of the farm by government is still extant. On 10 May 2022, the first respondent filed an urgent chamber application for a spoliation order against the appellant. The first respondent alleged that on 5... More
The actions of an Anglican Church priest David Dhlomo the first defendant, in selling his deceased mother’s house to second and third defendants without the knowledge of his siblings have resulted in the plaintiff (his sibling) dragging both the man of the cloth and the purchasers to court. The transaction has resulted in far reaching consequences for the parties factually, legally and financially. More
MAKONESE J: This is an application for review instituted in terms of Rule 62 of the High Court Rules, 2021. The applicant is a mining syndicate with mining rights over a mining location known as Fundisi ‘H’ Mining Block. More
Applicants seek an order interdicting the first respondent from proceeding with a disciplinary inquiry set down for tomorrow 1 June 2010. There is no specific relief sought against the other respondents. More
This is an appeal against the decision of Honourable Arbitrator D. Mudzengi issued on 19 March 2013. The arbitrator ordered that Respondents be reinstated without loss of pay and benefits from the date of the unlawful dismissal. If reinstatement is no longer an option, the parties were to negotiate damages to be paid in lieu of reinstatement within fourteen (14) days of receipt of the award. If parties fail to agree, either party may refer the matter to the arbitrator for quantification. More
On 13 April 2021, the parties argued an application for a joinder before me, and I reserved judgment. The applicant seeks to be joined as a respondent in the matter under HC 3727/20, where the first respondent is seeking an order compelling the second respondent to transfer, namely, 2418, 2442 and 1712 of Lot 2 of Clipsham situated in Masvingo. The application was made in terms of Order 13, Rule 87 (2) of the High Court Rules, 1971 (“the old Rules”). More
The head case of Rogers v Rogers 2008 (1) ZLR 330 (S) lays out when the court will exercise its power in terms of r 79 (2) of the High Court Rules, 1971 to stop an action which is frivolous and vexatious. The remedy will be granted sparingly as it is an extraordinary one whose effect is to interfere with the right of access to court. More
The two respondents in this application are the biological parents of the applicant who is an adult and is self-supporting and living independently of the respondents. The parents appeared before this court in case number HC 5592/22 which was determined by CHIRAWU-MUGOMBA J on 21 October 2022. In that matter the respondents herein were the applicants and the applicant the respondent. In case number HC 5592/22 the respondents herein sought a declaration conjoined with an interdict against the applicant. The dispute concerned the rights of occupation and control of a farm called Subdivision Z of Lot 1 of Marivale situated... More
The plaintiffs instituted action in this matter essentially challenging the appointment of first defendant’s appointment as Chief Chiwara on the basis that his appointment as Chief on 6 December 2013 was premised on incorrect information. They also allege that the appointment was wrongful as per the law and practice and principles of succession of the Karanga clan. More
Chikwavadombo Mastick Marange [“Chikwavadombo”] died on 8 September 2005. He was the substantive Chief Marange. Two persons acted in his place and stead, each in turn, after his death. These were one Ringisai Noah Marange and one Gilbert Marange. The first respondent eventually succeeded him as Chief Marange. More
The matter was placed before me as an application for condonation of late noting of appeal. Respondent took a point in limine to the effect that the application was no longer valid in view of a settlement agreement reached between the parties. The court upheld the point in limine and dismissed the application. It was indicated that the reasons for the decision would follow. More
This is an application for rescission of judgment in terms of Rule 449. The respondents raised points in limine one of which concerns the founding affidavit. That the founding affidavit is not properly commissioned and that therefore there is no affidavit before this court.
A look at the founding affidavit shows that at page 12 of the bound record of proceedings there is a paragraph 22 to the founding affidavit which is the last paragraph and the prayer as well as the applicant’s details. That page is not signed nor is it commissioned. There is, however a page 13 to... More
Defendant took a special plea and exception to intercept plaintiff`s suit for a declaratur, pleaded alternatively with contractual damages claim. The backdrop to the dispute is as follows; -plaintiff is an information technology consultant based in the Republic of South Africa. He appointed defendant, a firm of estate agents, to sell his immovable property situate in Harare and remit the sale proceeds cross-border to his base in South Africa.
[2] The property was indeed sold at a price of USD$190,000; but the funds were not transferred as per plaintiff`s instructions. Unresolved disagreements over this issue saw plaintiff issuing summons in... More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Magistrates’ Court sitting at Chinhoyi, handed down on 3 May 2021. The judgment granted the respondent(then applicant) an interdict prohibiting the applicant (then respondent) from allocating or selling stand number 996 Kuwadzana Township, Banket, to any person as it was registered in the name of the late Enock Dandajena. More
