Court Judgements
Browse Judgements by Year
The applicant instituted the instant application seeking an order that the first respondent holds in trust sums of money which are due to the second respondent by the first respondent. More
This is an application for summary judgment in terms of Rule 64 of the High Court Rules, 1971 which provides as follows
“(1) Where the defendant has entered appearance to a summons, the plaintiff may, at any time before a pretrial conference is held, make a court application in terms of this rule for the court to enter summary judgment for what is claimed in the summons and costs. More
This application is made in terms of r 236 (3) of the High Court of Zimbabwe Rules, 1971 on the basis that the respondents have not prosecuted an application which they filed in HC 4700/16 within the time provided by the rules. For that reason, the applicant seeks a dismissal of that application for want of prosecution. More
This claim is based on an acknowledgment of debt, (A.O.D). The brief facts surrounding this dispute are as follows. The plaintiff is a company that trades in fuel. The defendant was a director of Nhari Investments (Pvt) Ltd. The defendant and his co- directors traded in fuel under Mammoth Fuels. More
On 17 July 2017 I dismissed an application for rescission of judgment brought by the applicant. I have been requested to give reasons and these are they;
The brief facts of this matter are that the respondent issued summons against the applicant under HC case number 9528/16 for damages allegedly suffered by the respondent, through the applicant’s wrongful and unlawful extraction of chrome ore on the respondent’s mining claims. The respondent is the registered holder of chrome mining claims called VAN 17 registration number 33280 BM and DIVIDE registration number 41089 BM situate in Darwendale. More
Applicant issued summons against the defendant on 15 June 2016 claiming payment of $35 576.17 arising out of money lent and advanced to and duly acknowledged by the defendant, interest thereon and bank charges that may accrue at the bank’s prevailing rate from June 2016 and costs. More
The plaintiff’s (bank’s) claim against the defendants is for the payment of US$23 104.76, interest thereon at the prescribed rate and costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale in terms of the loan agreement. More
