This is a chamber application for condonation for late noting of appeal and leave to prosecute the appeal in person:
Applicant, represented by counsel, Mr Bvuma, was convicted of malicious damage to property, unlawful entry in aggravating circumstances and theft. For first count he was sentenced to 24 months imprisonment, 6 months of which were suspended for 5 years on conditions set. More
On 23 December 1995 Plaintiff and Defendant were married in terms of the then Marriage Act [Chapter 37], now the Marriages Act [Chapter 5:17]. The marriage was blessed with four children who are all majors. On 15 July 2010 Plaintiff issued out summons claiming a decree of divorce and ancillary relief. In his Declaration, Plaintiff stated that the marriage relationship between the parties has irretrievably broken down to the extent that there is no reasonable prospect of reconciliation. More
This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) in which it dismissed the appellant’s appeal against conviction for fraud as defined in s 136 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act [Chapter 9:23] (the Code) by the Magistrates Court. More
The application before me is for confirmation of a final order following the granting of a provisional order which was as follows:
1. The first respondent be and is hereby interdicted from disposing of Stand 655 Borrowdale Brooke Township of Stand 137 Borrowdale Brooke measuring 4428 square metres with title currently registered under Deed of Transfer No. 6402/2003 pending the finalisation of this application. More
This is an application for an order to declare s 8(1) of the Immigration Act [Chapter 4:02] (“the Act”) inconsistent with s 50 (2) Constitution of Zimbabwe (Amendment No. 20) Act 2013 (“Constitution”) and invalid. It is contended that s 8(1) of the Act is inconsistent with the Constitution in that it authorises an immigration officer to detain a suspect for a period not exceeding fourteen days without judicial oversight thus offending s 50(2) of the Constitution. The applicant anchors his standing on s 85(1)(d) of the Constitution, which allows any person acting in the public interest to approach a... More
On 21st November 2022, the plaintiff instituted the present summons action in terms of section 14 of the High Court Act [Chapter 07:06], in which he seeks the following declaratory and consequential relief:
a) An order declaring that the 1st Defendant (the Trust) is entitled to subscribe to, and the 2nd Defendant (Zimbabwe Platinum) is obliged to allot to the Trust, ordinary shares in the share capital of Zimbabwe Platinum constituting 10% (ten per centum) of the issued share capital of the Zimbabwe Platinum in terms of clause 3.2 of the ZIMPLATS MHONDORO-NGEZI CHEGUTU ZVIMBA COMMUNITY SHARE OWNERSHIP TRUST MA1315/2011... More
[1] The plaintiff, an individual, sues the defendant, a micro finance company, for payment of US$75 000-00. At trial the plaintiff’s claim reduced to US$63 830-00. The claim is based on two acknowledgements of debt by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff for US$11 500-00 and US$63 500-00 signed on separate occasions. In addition, the plaintiff relies on a certain extract of a resolution by the defendant. In essence this resolution proposed two alternative modes of repayment of the plaintiff’s amounts. More
