Court Judgements




Supreme Court Judgements

(1) EDMORE TAPERESU MAZAMBANI V (1) INTERNATIONAL EXPORT TRADING COMPANY (PRIVATE) LIMITED (2) C. CHITIYO (2020-06-29)
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court handed down on 4 September 2018, dismissing with costs, an application made by the appellant in terms of Article 34 of the Arbitration Act (Chapter 7:15) for the setting aside of an arbitral award issued in favour of the first respondent by the second respondent. More

(1) FISANI MOYO (2) VALENTINE MINE V (1) BLANKET MINE (1983) PRIVATE LIMITED (2) ZIMBABWE REPUBLIC POLICE GWANDA (3) PROVINCIAL MINING DIRECTOR N.O (2022-07-23)
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court of Zimbabwe handed down on the 31 August 2021, and ordering the eviction of the appellants and all those claiming occupation through them, from a mining claim labelled Valentine 56. At the end of the hearing, the court dismissed the appeal with costs and indicated that full reasons for the judgment would follow in due course. These are they. More

(1) ROBERT M GUMBURA (2) BLESSING CHIDUKE (3) LUCKMORE MATAMBANADZO (4) LUCK MHUNGU (5) TAURAI DODZO (6) THOMAS CHACHA (7) ELIJAH VHUMBUNU V (1) FRANCIS MAPFUMO N.O (2) THE NATIONAL PROSECUTING AUTHORITY (2019-11-11)
After hearing counsel in this matter we dismissed the appeal with no order as to costs and indicated that our reasons would follow in due course. Below are the reasons for judgement. More

(1) ZHIQIANG GAO (2) GUIBIAO ZHANG V (1) THE TAXING MASTER (2) DALIAN TIANCHENG MINERAL RESOURCES (PRIVATE) LIMITED (3) BAOMING HUANG (2022-11-25)
This is an opposed application for the review of taxation done by the first respondent in terms of r 56(2) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018 (“the Rules”). Essentially, the applicants contend that the first respondent acted wrongly in deciding that the second and third respondents’ legal practitioner was entitled to levy her fees using only the upper margin fee of her applicable range of fees and in allowing a fifty percent premium on the fees levied. More

(1) BEATRICE MTETWA (2) TAWANDA NYAMBIRAI (3) MZOKUTHULA MBUYISA (4) DOUGLAS COLTART V (1) RUNGWANDI ANDRUJUWA LEGAL PRACTITIONERS (2)TENDAI MURAMBIDZA (2023-07-25)
The appellants are partners of the law firm practising as Mtetwa&Nyambirai Legal Practitioners (“Mtetwa&Nyambirai”). The first respondent is a legal firm, whose principal is Mark Rujuwa, a former associate at the appellant’s law firm. The second respondent was previously employed by the appellants as an accounts clerk at their law firm. By virtue of his position as an accounts clerk, the second respondent was also a custodian of the keys to the safe ofMtetwa&Nyambirai. Sometime in February 2022, Mtetwa&Nyambirayi discovered that the second respondent had stolen ZWL$32 000 000.00 from its trust account and converted the same to United States... More


Midlands State University Library