Court Judgements

Court Judgements


Harare High Court Judgements

1. TYNWALD DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION-LOT 14 VERSUS LIFE MINISTRY ZIMBABWE AND THE MINISTER OF LOCAL GOVERNMNET, PUBLIC WORKS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 2. LIFE MINISTRY ZIMBABWE VERSUS TYNWALD DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION- LOT 14 AND THE MINISTER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (2017-01-25)
The above two applications were dealt with together at the request of the parties as the issues involved arise from the same agreement and the parties are the same save for the fact that the applicant in the first matter is the first respondent in the second matter and the applicant in the second matter is the first respondent in the first matter. More

1. NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY AUTHORITY VERSUS N. SVOVA AND 17 ORS 2. NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY AUTHORITY VERSUS R. MAKASI AND 11 ORS 3. NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY AUTHORITY VERSUS P. MUDYIWA AND 7 ORS 4. NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY AUTHORITY VERSUS W. MUGOBOGOBO AND 10 ORS (2013-09-04)
: When these matters first came before me on 18 July 2013, Mr Mpofufor the respondents sought a postponement to enable the respondents to attend to a host of house-keeping issues which were then outstanding. In particular, the respondents desired to submit bonds of security in terms of r 66 (1) of the High Court of Zimbabwe Rules, 1971 in order to meet the summary judgment applications. Although the application was strongly opposed by Mr Mazonde who appeared for the applicant, I granted the application as it was apparent that Mr Mpofu was not ready to argue the matter and... More

1. HOTHFIELD ENTERPRISES (PVT) LTD HC 12773/16 VERSUS MATEBELELAND ENGINEERING (PVT) LTD 2.TONY RENATO SARPO HC 12792/16 VERSUS MATEBELELAND ENGINEERING (PVT) LTD 3. TONY RENATO SARPO HC 12790/16 VERSUS YAGDEN ENGINEERING (PVT) LIMITED (2018-10-24)
These three matters were consolidated at the Pre-trial Conference stage. Because all three raised similar issues, largely involved the same parties and called for evidence from the same witnesses the consolidation for the purposes of a single trial was clearly justified. More

1. INNOCENT PARADZAYI MAKWIRAMITI HC 8866/14 VERSUS THE SHERIFF FOR ZIMBABWE AND SOLOMON SIGAUKE AND FANUEL MADYIRAPANZE AND PINIEL MATIZANADZO AND THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS AND KENNETH ARTHUR MAVHUNGA 2. SOLOMON SIGAUKE HC 8193/14 VERSUS INNOCENT PARADZAI MAKWIRAMITI (2017-07-26)
As the two matters involve the same subject matter they were consolidated for purposes of this trial. The determination of HC 8866/14 automatically determines the outcome of HC 8193/14. Although in HC 8866/14 Innocent Paradzayi Makwiramiti (Mr. Makwiramiti) sued 6 defendants it is only Solomon Sigauke (Mr Sigauke) who defended the matter, so he is the only defendant in that matter. So these two cases HC 8866/14 and HC 8193/14 involve Mr. Makwiramiti and Mr. Sigauke only. More

1. STATE VERSUS PHILLIP GONERA 2. STATE VERSUS WEBSTER MANYANGA 3. STATE VERSUS NETSAI KAVIYA (2022-08-01)
The three records of proceedings came to the High Court through referral by scrutinising regional magistrates in terms of s58 (3) of the Magistrates’ Court Act [Chapter 7:10]. The records were separately placed before two other judges and me. After a discussion, the judges were of the view that the concerns arising from the proceedings were similar. It was therefore prudent to address them in a composite judgment. More


Midlands State University Library

Midlands State University Library © 2024