Court Judgements
The first respondent instituted summons action against the present applicant and the second respondent in this court seeking an order for damages in the total sum of US$65 000-00 arising out of a motor vehicle accident which occurred at the 203 km peg along the Harare-Mutare road on 15 November 2009. In that collision, the first respondent’s Toyota Hiace Commuter Omnibus was extensively damaged, after it collided with a Toyota Diana minibus driven by the second respondent, and caught fire. More
This is an application for execution pending appeal.
On 9 July 2013 I granted the following order:-
“1. Execution of the judgment in case number HC 2583/10 pending appeal be and
is hereby granted.
2. Respondent shall pay the costs of suit on a Legal Practitioner and client scale”. More
This application is redolent with irregularities. This, understandably, constrained the respondent to raise a number of points in limine praying for its dismissal.
The irregularities complained of, which were not fully conceded by the applicant, are these:
1. the application does not comply with R 227(3) in that when it was filed, it did not contain a draft of the order sought; More
The Applicant is Zimbabwe Power Company a registered company in terms of the laws of this country. The Respondents are employees of the Applicant employed in various capacities, and based at Kariba where they occupied houses belonging to the Appellant. They are in these proceedings represented by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions.
It is common cause that the Respondents were in 2001 offered the right to purchase from the Appellant (who was previously known as Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority) the houses which they were occupying. More
The applicant through its Business Performance Manager, one Bernard Chizengeya, filed the present application for rescission of the order granted under case HC 4169/20 dated 21 October 2020. The present application is filed in terms of rule 449 (1) (a) of the High Court Rules, 1971 (“the old Rules”). What had happened is that, sometime in August 2020, the first respondent petitioned this court on an urgent basis under HC 4169/20 for an interdict. He sought an interim order in two parts, firstly, authorizing him to resume his mining and allied operations at Special Grants 7667, 7668, and 7669. Secondly,... More
This is an application in terms of Article 34(2) (b)(ii) of the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15] [the Act] for the setting aside of part of the arbitral award handed down by the 2nd Respondent (Justice N.T. Mtshiya (Rtd)) on 27 May 2022. The application is founded on the allegation that the arbitral award conflicts with Zimbabwe’s public policy. More
On 8 February 2017 the plaintiff issued summons against the defendant claiming the sum of $20 133.46 arising from the sale of books by the defendant on behalf of the plaintiff, the proceeds of which the defendant failed to remit. The plaintiff also claimed interest on that sum at the prescribed rate plus costs of suit.
The background facts as outlined by the plaintiff are these. Sometime in 2009 the parties entered into an agreement in terms of which the defendant would receive books from the plaintiff and sell them on its behalf for a commission of 30% of the... More
