Court Judgements




Masvingo High Court Judgements

BRIAN ANDREW CAWOOD VERSUS ELASTO MADZINGIRA AND THE MESSENGER OF COURT – MWENEZI N.O. (2017-03-06)
This was an urgent chamber application to stop an eviction on the grounds that the second respondent, the messenger of court, allegedly on the back and call of an official from the Ministry of Lands, was straying outside the four corners of the court order that defined the premises the applicant, and all those claiming occupation through him, had to be evicted from. More

BRIAN ANDREW CAWOOD [NO.2] VERSUS ELASTO MADZINGIRA AND MINISTER OF LANDS & RURAL RESETTLEMENT (2017-09-06)
On 31 May 2017 we dismissed the appellant’s appeal with costs. We promised to provide our reasons within fourteen days. Regrettably, the period proved too ambitious. We had not reckoned with a workload build-up in the days that followed. More

BRIAN GAVA VERSUS CHAMISA MAWERE AND CHAMPION CHAKANETSA (IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTOR OF ESTATE LATE CLAUDIO CHAKANETSA) AND MISHECK MIZEKE AND MESSENGER OF COURT – GWERU AND CITY OF GWERU AND REGISTRAR OF DEEDS – BULAWAYO N.O. (2019-05-08)
The property situate Stand 2468 Mkoba 7 Township in Gweru (“the property”) was at all relevant times owned by the fifth respondent, Gweru City Council. However, one Honest Pepolo was apparently buying it from Gweru City Council in terms of one of those standard term lease-to-buy agreements. Apparently in June 2004 Pepolo sold his rights and interest to one Claudio Chakanetsa, now deceased (“the deceased”). In these proceedings his estate was cited as the first respondent, duly represented by the executor. More

BRIGHTON NGWENYAMA VERSUS THE STATE (2020-12-10)
This is a remittal from the Supreme Court. We are to assess an appropriate sentence for the appellant.The order of remittal reads: More

BRIGHTON NGWENYAMA VS THE STATE (2019-09-10)
The applicant is one of three accused who were found guilty of contravening section 45(1)(b) of the Parks and Wildlife Act [Chapter 20:14] (possession of a live specially protected animal). The trial Magistrate sentenced the applicant along with his co-accused each to 9 years imprisonment. The applicant appealed and his sentence was reduced to 3 years imprisonment of which I year imprisonment was suspended (see HMA 33-19). More


Midlands State University Library