This is a ruling on whether or not present application should be treated as urgent. The background thereto is that the parties entered into a contract for the hire and lease of an excavator. That relationship soured. Present respondent instituted rei vindicatio proceedings in this court. More
This is an application for direct access to this Court, filed in terms of s 167 (5) of the Constitution as read with R 21 of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016. It is contested. If the application is granted, the applicant intends to file a substantive application with this Court, alleging that in dealing with a non-constitutional issue, the Supreme Court, (“ the court a quo”), violated its rights to be heard and to a fair hearing as guaranteed by s 69 (2) and (3) of the Constitution. More
This chamber application was opposed by the first respondent. I set it down for hearing on 21 July 2024. Applicant and Counsel for first respondent appeared. Applicant requested a postponement as he felt that his relatives had to be present. He indicated that he had not been aware of the set down date and only appeared because the Registrar of this court had called him on his cell phone. Counsel for the first respondent was not opposed to the application for postponement. I postponed the matter to 1 July 2024 at 1000hours. More
In this matter applicants seeks leave to file a supplementary affidavit in Case No HC 3261/23 in terms of Rule 59(12) of the High Court Rules, 2021.
The founding affidavit was deposed to by the fourth applicant who is the mother to the first to third applicants. More
The applicants approached this court seeking rescission of a default judgment granted against the 3rd and 4th applicants in case number HC 5359/23. The order granted in default seeks the eviction of the said applicants and all those occupying the premises through them from the church premises being Stand 2666 Rujeko Township Marondera. More
This is an application for Stay of Execution pending the determination of an application for rescission of an order for the eviction of the third and fourth applicants from church premises as per the Judgement and Court Order under case number HC 5359/23. The order also directs the eviction from church premises all those occupying the said premises through the third and fourth applicants. More
This is an urgent chamber application for an interim interdict, in particular for what is commonly referred to as an anti-dissipation interdict. This form of an interdict is a summary order meant to preserve assets by restraining their disposal pending the determination of a dispute involving the parties. The dispute pending is an action matter Case No. HC1349/24 initiated by the applicant against the first respondent. More
