Court Judgements
DUBE-BANDA J:The Applicant seeks the evictionof the first respondent and all those claiming the right of occupation through her from an immovable property located on registered Site number 740, which is said to be a site for housing containing no more than 12ha held in connection with the Mining Location, named Big Ben under registration number 32538 (the housing site). The application is opposed by the first respondent More
On 5 June 2012 I handed down an ex tempore judgment for the registration of an arbitral award made in favour of the applicant against the respondent on the basis that there was no merit in the opposition to such registration. More
This urgent chamber application for a provisional interdict is anchored on an appeal filed with this court on 22 March 2018. More
On 16 January 2023, I gave a brief ex-tempore judgement partially granting the relief sought by the applicant. The respondent has since requested for the full reasons for that decision and what follows are those reasons. More
The plaintiff and the defendant are husband and wife. They were married on the 7th of September 2018 in terms of the then Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11]. One child was born to the marriage, namely Simbarashe Tadzidza Tapera who was born on 9 April 2019. The parties have been on separation since the 31st of December 2019 and the defendant has custody of the minor child. On the 7th of October 2021, the plaintiff instituted divorce proceedings in which he seeks a decree of divorce on grounds of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. He wants the defendant to retain custody... More
Applicant applied to this Court for condonation of a belated appeal in terms of Rule 22 of the Labour Court Rules S.I. 150/17. Respondents opposed the application. I shall deal with the application under 2 subtitles. More
The chamber application was made ostensibly in “terms of rules 32(2) and 12 of the Constitutional Court Rules, 2016” (“the Rules”). The applicant sought an order for leave to appeal from the ruling of a magistrate denying him a referral to the Constitutional Court (“the Court”) of four questions for determination. Rule 32(2) of the Rules provides that “a litigant who is aggrieved by the decision of a subordinate court on a constitutional matter can apply to the Constitutional Court for leave to appeal against such decision”. More
