[1]This is an application for summary judgment made in terms of r30 of the High Court Rules, 2021. For consistency, I propose to refer to the parties as they are cited in the main action.
[2]On 14 February 2023, the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant claiming delivery of a motor vehicle, namely a Ford Ranger registration number AEF 7621 (‘the motor vehicle’), being a vehicle owned by the plaintiff and which, the plaintiff claimed, the defendant possesses without lawful cause. On 1 March 2023, the defendant filed a notice of entry of appearance to defend, followed by a plea... More
This appeal challenges the whole decision rendered by the Registrar of Trade Marks [the Registrar], dated 18 November 2022, upholding expungement of the HI-TET trade mark no.508/2009 while allowing the HITET trade mark no. 205/1989 to remain on the Register of Trade marks [the Register More
1.This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) handed down on 17 June 2020 under judgment number HH-405-20. The court a quo set aside portions of a forensic audit report on the National Social Security Authority (NSSA) wherever the first respondent was referred to directly or indirectly. The forensic audit had been conducted by BDO Zimbabwe Chartered Accountants on behalf of the Auditor-General of Zimbabwe. More
At the hearing of this matter, I dismissed it with no order as to costs. Reasons for that decision have been requested. These are they.
The Applicant approached the court on an urgent basis seeking his immediate release from detention and a declaratory order that the conduct of the First Respondent in detaining him at Harare Remand Prison without furnishing him with the reasons thereof is unlawful. He submitted that he was detained without charge or explanation and was not aware of any offence or reason for his detention. He further submitted that the arrest contravenes the Constitution and the... More
This Application concerns a double sale of an immovable property called Stand 1015 Heights Kariba (the property). The parties to the application are set out in the heading. I do not therefore restate them. The background facts are not in serious dispute.
At the commencement of the hearing the first and the second respondents opposing papers and heads of argument were time barred. The bar was uplifted by consent. The first and the second respondents then formally withdrew case No HC 5015/22 and tendered costs on the legal practitioner and client scale. Case No HC 5015/22 was an application to... More
This is a court application for an interdict where the applicant seeks the following order:
1.“The first to third Respondents and all those claiming through them be and are hereby barred from accessing Stand No. 33784 Caledonia Harare without the express consent of the Applicant More
[1] This is an opposed chamber application brought on a certificate of urgency, in terms of which the applicant seeks an interim interdict in the following terms:
Final relief sought
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
i. 1st respondent and all persons acting through or on its behalf, be and are hereby permanently interdicted from interfering in any manner with the applicant’s mining operations at claims registration numbers 41445BM and 41446BM.
ii. 1st respondent shall bear costs of suit. More
