Court Judgements




(1) GREATERMANS STORES (1979) (PRIVATE) LIMITED T/A THOMAS MEIKLES STORES (2) MEIKLES HOSPITALITY (PRIVATE) LIMITED V (1) THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SERVICE, LABOUR AND SOCIAL WELFARE (2) THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (2018-03-28)
This case raises for determination questions of the constitutionality of civil legislation’s retrospective effect. More

(1) RETINUE STARS INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED V (1) OLYMPUS GOLD ZIMBABWE LIMITED (2) MINISTER OF MINES AND MINING DEVELOPMENT N.O (3) PROVINCIAL MINING DIRECTOR MATEBELELAND NORTH N.O (4) ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY (5) CITY OF BULAWAYO (6) DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING SERVICES OF THE CITY OF BULAWAYO (2024-03-14)
This is an appeal against the whole judgement of the High Court (“the court a quo”) delivered on 2 March 2023. The court a quo dismissed an appellant made by the applicant in terms of s 4 of the Administrative Justice Act [Chapter 10:28] (“AJA”) More

(1) RIOZIM LIMITED (2) RM ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LIMITED V (1) MARANATHA FERROCHROME (PRIVATE) LIMITED (2) JUSTICE NOVEMBER TAFUMA MTSHIYA (RTD) (2022-02-24)
The two appellants and the first respondent are Zimbabwean companies registered in terms of the law. The second respondent is an Arbitrator who is presiding over a dispute between the appellants and the first respondent. RM Enterprises (Private) Limited (the second appellant) is a wholly owned subsidiary of Riozim Limited (the first appellant). On 19 January 2010 the first appellant and Maranatha Ferrochrome (Private) Limited (the first respondent) entered into a memorandum of Shareholders’ Agreement. In terms of the agreement, the first appellant was to ensure that 40 per cent of issued shares in the second appellant would be transferred... More

(1) AUGUR INVESTMENTS (2) DOOREST PROPERTIES V (1) FAIRCLOT INVESTMENT (2) THE SHERIFF (3) THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS (2023-09-15)
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) sitting at Harare, handed down on 9 May 2023, dismissing the first appellant’s application for a declaration under case HC 5989/19 and granting the first respondent’s application to set aside the second respondent’s decision to uplift judicial attachment on stand 654 Pomona Township, under case HC 10315/19. More

(1) CALEB DENGU (2) CALEB DENGU FAMILY TRUST V (1) EASTERN & SOUTHERN AFRICAN TRADE & DEVELOPMENT BANK T/A PTA BANK (2) RESERVE BANK OF ZIMBABWE (3) REGISTRAR OF DEEDS N.O (2024-01-11)
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) wherein the court dismissed the appellants’ claim. The claim was for the cancellation of mortgage bond 11422/2001 registered over a certain piece of land situate in the District of Salisbury called Stand 731 Glen Lorne Township 15 of Lot 41 of Glen Lorne measuring 5 960 square metres held under deed of transfer No. 11317/2000 dated 31 November, 2001 and alternative declaratory relief confirming the abandonment or waiver of rights by the first respondent. Additionally, the appellants sought an order declaring any cession of... More

(1) CHRISTOPHER KUFAKWEMBA (2) GODFREY MASENHU (3) BENSON JOEL (4) LANGTON NYAKUDIRWA V THE STATE (2024-03-18)
This is an appeal against the whole judgment of the High Court (the court a quo) in which all the appellants were convicted of murder as defined in s 47 (1) (b) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] and each was sentenced to death. More

(1) COLLINS MANGENJE (2) GODWIN MANGENJE V (1) ISAAC TIGERE TICHARWA(IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE DULY APPOINTED EXECUTOR DATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE KENNEDY MANGENJE DRMRE 329/18) (2) MANGENJE BROTHERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION) (3) CECIL MADONDO (IN HIS CAPACITY AS LIQUIDATOR OF MANGENJE BROTHERS (PVT) LTD) (4) MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT (2023-11-07)
The first respondent brought an application in the court a quo for the provisional liquidation of the second respondent in terms of s 5 (1) (b) (iii) of the Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07] (the Act). The section authorizes one or more members of a company to apply for an order to wind up a company in circumstances where it is just and equitable that the company be liquidated. Section 4 (1) of the Act clothes the first respondent, in his capacity as executor with the authority to apply for the liquidation of the second respondent as a debtor of the... More


Midlands State University Library