The papers before me show that the claimant was served with the court application and in terms of the rules, if it was desirous to oppose the matter, it should have filed opposing papers. It did not. More
The judgment creditor obtained judgment against Webster Ngwaru and Confuels (Pvt) Ltd in Case No. HC 2122/10 on 1 December 2010 in the sum of US$364 434 together with interest and costs of suit. More
The plaintiff is a daughter to defendant’s ex-husband, Charles Makani. At the time of instituting this suit the two were still married.
The plaintiff’s father acquired an immovable property, namely no. 9 Dorset Road East, Avondale Harare for the plaintiff in the year 2001. The property was registered in the plaintiff’s name. The plaintiff was a minor then. More
This is an application for a review of the proceedings held before the Respondent. Applicants are seeking an order quashing the proceedings and that fresh proceedings be held before an independent Labour Officer of Arbitrator. At the onset of the proceedings the Respondent’s Counsel raised a point in limine that there was no proper application before me. I dismissed that the application and indicated reasons would follow alongside the main judgment. More
The applicant is the registered user of certain trade marks belonging to AECI Limited, a South African registered company. The same marks were assigned by their proprietor to ICI South Africa (Pty) Ltd which assignment does not affect the status of the registered user, the applicant. More
On 30 November 2011, and after hearing viva voce evidence from the plaintiff and considering the fairly detailed submissions made by the plaintiff’s counsel I granted the following order: More
The plaintiff issued summons out of this court on 9 December 2011 seeking the eviction of the defendant and all who claim occupation through him from Stand 271B St Mary’s Zengeza Chitungwiza, payment of rentals of US$100 per month from 1 October to 30 November 2011 and holding over damages from December 2011 to the date of eviction, interest at the prescribed rate and costs on the scale of legal practitioner and client. The defendant contested the matter. More
