At a resumed Pre-Trial Hearing held in my Chambers on the 4th October 2017; with plaintiff having made an application in terms of Order 26 r 182 (11), I ordered that the seconddefendant’s defence be struck out and that judgment as prayed for by the plaintiff in his declaration be ordered against second defendant. More
The applicant was convicted of raping the complainant his step daughter with whom he was residing in Johannesburg South Africa. He was sentenced to 18 years imprisonment 4 years of which was suspended on the usual conditions of good behaviour. The applicant has appealed against both conviction and sentence. He has also applied for bail pending appeal. In August 2015 the applicant’s application for bail was refused by TAGU J who handed judgement No. HH 706/15 in which the court ruled among other things that sexual intercourse was also confirmed by the medical report. In his judgment the regional magistrate... More
: The plaintiff and the defendant were married on 24 May 2002 and on 15 April 2016 the plaintiff filed summons for divorce and other ancillary relief against the defendant.
During the course of their marriage the parties were blessed with two children who are still minors. They acquired movable and immovable property. Sometime in March 2017 after the commencement of these proceedings the plaintiff who was employed and later retrenched by the National Social Security Authority (NSSA) got his retrenchment package.
At the per-trial conference held on 26 March 2018 the parties made concessions and agreed that their marriage... More
This is an application for a declaratur in terms of which the applicant seeks the following order.
1. That the allocation and sale of stands 19751 – 19793 Budiriro Township to applicant’s member co-operatives by the first respondent is legally binding and
2. The first, second and third respondents be and are hereby ordered to stop the re-planning and or re-allocation of stands 19751 – 19793 to any other person who is not the applicant’s member co-operatives.
3. The sixth respondent be and is hereby ordered to demolish the brick and mortar wall erected encroaching over the applicant’s member co-operatives... More
Having deemed the application urgent, I proceeded to hear submissions on merit. The facts of the matter are:
Applicant had a special grant to carry out prospecting operations in June 2016 which expired 12 months later in July 2017. Renewal was denied. Applicant claims to have installed a gold mill at the farm. It discontinued mining operations and claims to have remained in peaceful possession of the mill. Apparently the respondent has first mining rights in the very area the gold mill is located. More
This was an urgent chamber application. The relief sought was poorly laid out in the draft order. But its essence was basically an interim interdict to bar the police board of enquiry [hereafter referred to as “the suitability enquiry board” or, in short, “the SEB”] from investigating the suitability or fitness of the applicant, a police constable, to remain a member of the force, or to retain his rank or salary. The interdict was sought pending the determination of a certain review application that was filed in this court under case no HC 392/17. More
