The applicant and the respondents have previously been involved in litigation over mining claims known as Cleveland II, Cleveland 13 and Cleveland. In case number HC 2565/22 the applicant who was the 1st respondent therein had judgment granted against him wherein he was divested of his claim to the mining claims. More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Zimbabwe (‘court a quo’) dated 15 June 2023 in which it dismissed an application for a final interdict sought by the appellant against the respondents. The first respondent, which had an obvious interest in the matter, vigorously opposed the application while the second and the third respondents chose to abide by the decision of the court. More
The matter was placed before me as an application for condonation for late filing of an application for review against the Respondent’s Hearing Officer’s determination handed down on 16th October, 2018. The application is premised on Rule 22 as read with Rule 20 of the Labour Court Rules, Statutory Instrument of 2017. The application is opposed. More
: This judgement is rendered pursuant to an application for absolution from the instance made by the defendant at the close of the plaintiff’s case in terms of rule 56 (6) of the High Court rules, 2021 (the Rules). The plaintiff is the father and natural guardian of Rebecca Nezuru Conlon (hereafter referred to as Rebecca or the child). The plaintiff issued summons against the defendant for the payment of the sum of USD$ 6 370 000 (six million Three Hundred and Seventy Thousand United states dollars) being damages arising from injuries sustained by Rebbecca (a minor at the material... More
The plaintiffs claim herein is for provisional sentence in the sum of US$203, 000.00, together with interest on that amount at the agreed rate of 5% per month calculated from 1 May 2021 to the date of payment in full and costs of suit on the attorney and client scale. The parties appeared before the court in the unopposed motion court on 29 May 2024. The defendant had filed a notice of opposition to the claim prior to their appearance. More
The parties herein married in 1999. The plaintiff, Rutendo Tandi, seeks divorce from the defendant, Theresa Tandi on the grounds of irretrievable down of their marriage. There are two children from the marriage both of whom have reached the age of majority. It is also common cause that the plaintiff is in agreement that the two immovable properties that are already in his wife’s name should be retained by her. The parties are also agreed in general that household movables acquired during their marriage should go to the defendant save for contestation regarding two motor vehicles. More
: This is a court application for review made in terms of s 26 of the High Court Act, [Chapter 7:06] as read with Order 33 of the high Court Rules. 1971. The grounds for review are given as follows:
1. “The learned magistrate grossly erred at law and in fact in concluding that the default was wilful when the applicant was in court just after the default was passed. That the applicant saw that first respondent still at court.
2. The learned magistrate grossly erred in failing to treat this matter with fairness and the applicant was in wilful... More
