Court Judgements
This is an application filed on urgency by a self-actor seeking an order in the following terms;
“INTERIM RELIEF:
a) An order barring and interdicting the respondents from disturbing or interfering with the applicant’s right to prospect minerals at Queensdale Farm in Kadoma.
b) An order directing the respondents to observe peace at the applicant and its assignees.
TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
1. It is hereby declared that the actions by the 1st respondent to disturb applicant from exercising its right to prospect and search for minerals at Queensdale in Kadoma is hereby declared unlawful.
2. 1st respondent to... More
This is an opposed urgent chamber application in which the first and second applicants seek the following relief:
IT IS ORDERD THAT:
1. The respondent and all those claiming occupation through him be and are hereby ordered to restore vacant possession of the mining location being a position of Queensdale Farm measuring 9 hectares with the following co-ordinates: 199925; 7958476; B0200125; 7958914; C0200278; 7958822; D0200115; 7958045; DP0200045; 7958510 to the applicants upon service of this order.
2. Respondent shall pay costs of suit More
The first and second applicants have approached this court on an urgent basis seeking the relief for leave to sue the second respondent in terms of Section 126(1)(b) of the Insolvency Act [Chapter 6:07]. In particular, the Applicants’ prayer, according to the draft order reads as follows:
“1. Application for leave to sue the 2nd Respondent be and is hereby granted.
2. 1st Respondent shall pay costs of suit.” More
When this court application was filed it was erroneously filed as “case number HCA 43/09” meaning that it was an appeal case in the Appellate Division of the High Court. That was an error.
The correct position was that the applicant was seeking condonation for the late filing of his review application.
When the applicant appeared in court with his legal practitioner Miss N. Ndlovu on 14 October 2014 he withdrew the matter and tendered wasted costs. He was however ordered to pay costs on an attorney and client scale due to the manner he handled his case. More
In the present matter, applicant, who is a qualified and registered pharmacist is desirous of obtaining declaratory and other relief from this Court, so that she can carry out her business idea within the confines of the law. Her business idea is to compile and publish a database for the benefit of, and use by the public; of all medical services and providers of health care and registered drugs and their location, to enable the public to access that information in an efficient and cost-effective manner. She has established a company, of which she is a major share-holder called Medical... More
The plaintiff issued summons out of this court seeking a decree of divorce, custody of the parties’ minor children and ancillary relief. The facts in this case were mainly common cause and most of the issues were resolved at the Pre Trial Conference which was held before a judge in chambers. The parties reduced the terms of their settlement into writing and indicated during the hearing that they would like it to be made an order of the court upon finalisation of the trial. More
KARWI J: The appellant was arraigned before the Magistrates’ court at Bindura facing six counts as follows:
Count One: Assault as defined in s 89 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Cap 9:23]
Count Two: Undermining Police Authority as defined in s 177 (a) (1) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Cap 9:23]
Count Three: Assaulting a Police Officer as defined in s 176 of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform Act) [Cap 9:23]
Count Four: Assault as defined in s 89 (1) (a) of the Criminal Law (Codification & Reform) Act [Cap 9:23]... More
