Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Citation and Joinder re: Approach, the Joinder of Necessity and Third Party Notices

Appealed
SC10-12 : DANISO WAKATAMA and IVORY MATANHIRE and JAPHET KABANGA and BINDURA MUNICIPALITY vs TINASHE MADAMOMBE
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and CHEDA JA

The question whether the non-joinder of the Minister of Local Government, Rural and Urban Development is fatal need not detain this court and can easily be disposed by reference to Rule 87 of the Rules of the High Court, which provides: “(1) No cause or matter shall be defeated by reason of the mis-joinder or non-joinder ...
More

HH25-08 : ZIMBABWE DEVELOPMENT BANK and INTERNATIONAL FINANCE CORPORATION vs DAVID SCOTT and OTHERS
Ruled By: GOWORA J

The applicants have jointly approached this court for an order in the following terms:“That the confirmation of the liquidation and distribution account by the third respondent, in respect of Shagelok Chemicals (Private) Limited (in liquidation), be and is hereby set aside.That the third respondent be and is hereby directed to ...
More

HH20-12 : JANE PHIRI vs PATSON NAWASHA
Ruled By: MUTEMA J

The dispute in casu is steeped in the sale of a deceased immovable property whose purchase price was paid by the applicant but transfer of which the respondent failed to effect. The draft order the applicant seeks is couched in these words: “IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The respondent is hereby ordered to deliver and register a four roomed house; ...
More

HH115-12 : MUGANDANI ENTERPRISES (PVT) LTD T/A MUGA FOODS vs TRINPAC (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MUTEMA J

The salient aspects of the opposition are as follows:- 1….,. 2….,. 3….,. 4. The mortgagor bound itself as a surety and co-principal debtor yet that mortgagor was not cited as a party to the proceedings despite it being an interested party….,. Regarding aspect number 4 supra the mortgage bond clearly states that the mortgagor is a surety and co-principal debtor. In Muchabaiwa v Grab Enterprises ...
More

Appealed
HH94-12 : ERIC MUSUNDIRE vs OK ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: BERE J

I have no doubt in my mind that at the time the police officers detained the plaintiff they had nothing on them to show there was reasonable suspicion that the plaintiff had committed the alleged criminal offence. The plaintiff's case would have been neater if he had jointly sued the police with the defendant. Be that as ...
More

HH29-08 : STEWART MUNGOFA vs WILLIAM SANDE and DRUSILLA MUNGOFA
Ruled By: CHATUKUTA J

The second respondent instituted proceedings for divorce and ancillary relief in case No. HC1195/04 against the applicant.The applicant filed a counter-claim in which he cited the first respondent as the second defendant in that matter. He claimed, from the first respondent, adultery damages alleging that the first respondent was the ...
More

HH32-09 : MAFOSHORO FARM (PVT) LTD vs HURBERT NYANHONGO and TENDAI MBEREKO
Ruled By: CHITAKUNYE J

The applicant is a company with limited liability which purports to own all agricultural equipment and implements and runs farming operations at ELDORADO OF GWINDINGWI commonly known as MAFOSHORO FARM (PVT) LTD.The first respondent is a beneficiary of land wherein he was offered the “whole of Eldorado of Gwindingwi in ...
More

HH32-12 : ZELLCO CELLULLAR PL vs NETONE CELLULLAR PL and DR CALLISTUS NDLOVU and REWARD KANGAI and LYNDON NKOMO
Ruled By: GOWORA J

On 13 April 2011, under Case No. HC3507/11, PATEL J granted a provisional order in the following terms;“INTERIM RELIEF GRANTEDPending the determination of this matter, the applicant is granted the following interim relief;1. The decision of the Respondent to cancel the Service Provider Agreement be and is hereby declared unlawful ...
More

HH02-10 : JOHN RODGER & OTHERS vs FRIK MULLER & OTHERS
Ruled By: PATEL J

The first and second applicants are directors of the third applicant, which operates safari activities in the Zambezi Valley Area.The first and second respondents are directors of the third respondent, which is also a safari operator.The fourth respondent is the National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (the Authority) responsible for ...
More

HH44-10 : JOHN STRONG (PVT) LTD and TOBS STRONG (PVT) LTD vs WILLIAM WACHENUKA
Ruled By: CHATUKUTA J

This is an application for contempt of court.The background to this application is that the applicants were the owners of Disi Farm (the farm). The farm has since been acquired by the State. The respondent was issued with an offer letter for subdivision 7 (Plot 7) of the farm by ...
More

HH37-08 : MOVEMENT FOR DEMOCRATIC CHANGE and MORGAN TSVANGIRAI vs CHAIRPERSON, ZIMBABWE ELECTORAL COMMISSION and CHIEF ELECTIONS OFFICER, ZIMBABWE ELECTORAL COMMISSION
Ruled By: UCHENA J

The first applicant, the Movement for Democratic Change, is a political party, commonly known as the (“MDC”). It will be referred to as the first applicant. The second applicant, Mr Morgan Tsvangirai, is its President. He was the first applicant's Presidential candidate in the just ended harmonized elections held on ...
More

HH45-08 : HILLARY SIMBARASHE vs ZIMBABWE ELECTORAL COMMISSION and MABEL CHINOMONA
Ruled By: KUDYA J

At the management meeting that was held on 21 May 2008, three preliminary issues were referred to trial. They were framed as follows:1. Whether the petition is out of time, and, if so, whether this is fatal to the petition.2. Whether the failure to file security for costs timeously renders ...
More

HH119-09 : ISAAC MANDI vs GRACE MCHICHWA (as Executrix Dative Estate Late Peter Kandeya) and RUWA LOCAL BOARD and MINISTRY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Ruled By: GOWORA J

On 15 October 2009, after hearing counsel, I dismissed this application with costs. The applicant's legal practitioners have now indicated that they require reasons for the dismissal and these are they: During his lifetime, Peter Kandeya entered into an agreement with the third respondent in terms of which he, Peter Kandeya, leased from the respondent certain premises known ...
More

HH128-09 : ROUTE TOUTE BV & OTHERS vs MINISTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY RESPONSIBLE FOR LAND LAND REFORM AND RESETTLEMENT & OTHERS
Ruled By: PATEL J

The 1st applicant in this matter is a business corporation registered in the Netherlands. The other three applicants are commercial farming entities registered in Zimbabwe. The applicants together, directly or indirectly, are the registered owners and leaseholders of Fangudu Farm (the farm). They claim the right to continue to own ...
More

HH148-09 : BOK ESTATES (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs HUBERT MASARA AND MR MASARA AND MR MAKANDA AND MINISTER OF STATE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY, LANDS, LAND REFORM AND SETTLEMENT
Ruled By: BERE J

As for the third respondent, having had the privilege of hearing him in court, in addition to his own filed opposing affidavit, I am satisfied that the applicant must be deemed to have accepted his occupation of the portion of the farm which he is occupying. For a long time, the applicant's representative has ...
More

HH154-09 : PETHIAS CHITSUNGO vs D. MASUKU and RUWA LOCAL BOARD
Ruled By: MTSHIYA J

This is an opposed application where the applicant seeks the following relief:- “1. Applicant shall deposit $10,000,000,000= into the Registrar of High Court's temporary deposit account the outstanding balance towards the purchase price of Stand No.3519, Dzivaguru Crescent, Ruwa, for first respondent. 2. Thereafter, first respondent shall proceed to cede his rights, interests and title in Stand No.3519, Dzivaguru Crescent, ...
More

HH163-09 : MTOMBENI REGINALD vs TAPFUMANEYI MUPFURAREHWE
Ruled By: GOWORA J

The first respondent is the registered owner of a motor vehicle Isuzu KB 250, registration number 524-884G. The applicant prays for an order that the vehicle be released to him on the basis of an Agreement of Sale he alleges was concluded in respect of the vehicle on 29 August 2008. The background to the dispute is ...
More

HH169-09 : GRAMARA (PRIVATE) LIMITED and COLIN CLOETE vs GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ZIMBABWE and ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF ZIMBABWE and NORMAN KAPANGA (INTERVENER)
Ruled By: PATEL J

The two applicants herein were parties, together with 77 others, in a matter that was adjudicated by the Southern African Development Community Tribunal (the Tribunal) in the case of Mike Campbell (Pvt) Ltd Others v The Republic of Zimbabwe Case No. SADC(T) 2/2007.The Tribunal gave its judgment in ...
More

HB10-09 : BUSISIWE ANNAH SIBANDA vs DAN SIBANDA and MATABEZI VUKA UZENZELE TRUST
Ruled By: CHEDA J

This is an application for joinder of the second respondent. The applicant issued summons on the 7th of May 2008. After issuing summons, she then discovered that the matrimonial assets had been donated to the second respondent. The effect of this is that, left as it is, the assets do not form part of the matrimonial ...
More

HB10-09 : BUSISIWE ANNAH SIBANDA vs DAN SIBANDA and MATABEZI VUKA UZENZELE TRUST
Ruled By: CHEDA J

Counsel for the applicant has urged the court to adopt a robust approach in this matter. In support of that assertion, reference was made to Order 13 Rule 87(2)(b) of the High Court Rules which reads :– “(2) At any stage of the proceedings, in any cause or matter, the court may, on such terms as it thinks ...
More

HB10-09 : BUSISIWE ANNAH SIBANDA vs DAN SIBANDA and MATABEZI VUKA UZENZELE TRUST
Ruled By: CHEDA J

In Marais and Another v Pongola Sugar Milling Company and Other 1961 (2) SA 698, a two-tier approach was formulated in the determination of a joinder and is thus –“(1) That a party must have direct and substantial interest in the issues raised in the proceedings before the court; and that(2) His rights may be ...
More

HB10-09 : BUSISIWE ANNAH SIBANDA vs DAN SIBANDA and MATABEZI VUKA UZENZELE TRUST
Ruled By: CHEDA J

With regards to the question as to whether the second respondent should be joined or not, counsel for the first and second respondents was unable to cite any authorities in the first respondent's favour. The question which falls for determination, in my view, still remains as to whether or not the second respondent should be joined ...
More

HH06-10 : HARLAND BROTHERS (PVT) LIMITED and RAYMOND FINAUGHTY vs THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and MRS WINNIE MUSHIPE
Ruled By: MUSAKWA J

As for the second respondent, counsel for the second respondent submitted that his client denies any involvement in the conduct complained of. He thus submitted that the application is directed at the wrong respondent. This is because in the second applicant's founding affidavit, the leaders of the despoilers are named as Maliswa/Mliswa and Vashco. There ...
More

HH11-10 : NABANE ROY TSHUMA vs TONGAI MUSEMBURI and TENDAI MUSEMBURI and MACKSON TOTSHANE NCUBE and THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: KARWI J

On 5 October 1994, the first and second defendants applied to join the third defendant and the Registrar of Deeds, and the application was granted on 14 December 1994.
More

HH14-10 : SOBUZA GULA-NDEBELE vs CHINEMBIRI ENERGY BHUNU N.O.
Ruled By: MAKARAU JP

It is therefore my finding that the non-citation of the President in this application is fatal to the applicant's application. As indicated..., it is untenable for the applicant to suggest that he can attack the recommendation of the Tribunal only without affecting the act of the President to remove him from office. The act of removing ...
More

View Appeal
HH28-10 : JONATHAN MOYO and MOSES NDLOVU and PATRICK DUBE and SIYABONGA NCUBE vs AUSTIN ZVOMA N.O. CLERK OF PARLIAMENT OF ZIMBABWE and LOVEMORE MOYO
Ruled By: PATEL J

The applicants in this matter are all duly elected Members of Parliament. The first respondent is the Clerk of Parliament, cited herein in his official capacity. The second respondent was elected to the position of Speaker of the House of Assembly on the 25th of August 2008.The applicants challenge the ...
More

HH39-10 : HILDA SALILA AND MARIA SALILA vs GERRY MUNYARADZI SALILA N.O. and HUGHES SALILA MUSARIRA and MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT and THREE OTHERS
Ruled By: MUSAKWA J

After the institution of the present proceedings, the fifth and sixth respondents sought an order of joinder.....,.
More

HH45-10 : CHRISTMAS MUSONI vs NABOTH JOKONOKO and SHURUGWI TOWN COUNCIL
Ruled By: CHITAKUNYE J

The plaintiff sued the two defendants claiming basically for his restoration as the registered buyer of House Number 360 Makusha Township, Shurugwi.In his summons and declaration, the plaintiff alleged, that, on 20 August 1981 he entered into a written agreement of sale with Dickson Katerere (“D. Katerere”) in respect of ...
More

HH69-10 : COTTON COMPANY OF ZIMBABWE LIMITED vs MOBIL OIL ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD AND TOTAL ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MAKARAU JP

It may be pertinent at this stage to note that at the conclusion of the trial of the matter in March 2009, but before counsel had made their closing submissions, counsel for the plaintiff indicated that he intended to make an application for joinder; to join to the proceedings Total Zimbabwe (Private) Limited as the ...
More

HH76-10 : ROSEMARY CHINJAYANI vs MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS and COMMISSIONER OF POLICE and DETECTIVE INSPECTOR MUKOSI
Ruled By: UCHENA J

The third respondent is the Investigating Officer of the frauds, whose proceeds are believed to have been used to purchase the motor vehicle in question.
More

HH114-10 : IAN SPENCE GRAY and PRINCIPLE BASED SOLUTIONS P/L vs THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: GOWORA J

The first applicant is a Director in the second applicant.
More

HH116-10 : DEBORAH GLORIA KOUMIDES vs PAUL KOUMIDES
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA J

The Pre-Trial Conference Minute also records that the plaintiff gave notice of the intention to apply for joinder of Elena Koumides, the elder child, who, it is stated, recently became a major, as a co-plaintiff.
More

HH121-10 : POWER COACH EXPRESS (PVT) LIMITED vs MARTIN MILLERS AND ENGINEERS
Ruled By: BERE J

NON-JOINDER OF TOTAL ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD The argument raised by the defendant was that because Total Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd had an interest in this matter its non-joinder was fatal to the plaintiff's case. I do not accept this argument. The issue of misjoinder or non joinder of parties is sufficiently covered in our Rules and it is clear ...
More

HH150-10 : STRAUSS LOGISTICS LIMITED (UK) vs BP & SHELL MARKETING SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED and SHELL ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED and BP ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: PATEL J

For the respondents', it is submitted that the present application is entirely misdirected in that it is BP Africa Limited and Shell Petroleum Company Limited who are selling their shares in the second and third respondents and who should have been joined in this matter from the outset. The principal interim relief sought by ...
More

HH170-10 : ASSESTFIN (PVT) LIMITED vs ANTONY PAREWA and PAUL CHIDAWANYIKA and TAKTA INVESTMENTS (PVT) LIMITED and CHIGWANDA AND ASSOCIATES LEGAL PRACTITIONERS and REGISTRAR OF DEEEDS
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA J

The first and second respondents further contend, in limine, that the applicant company sold the property in question to Total Insurance Company Limited..., in 2004 when Oniyas Gumbo was still a Director, and that the failure to cite Total Insurance Company Limited is a non-joinder that renders the application totally defective and warrants the ...
More

HH172-10 : COTTON GINNERS ASSOCIATION vs SINO ZIMBABWE COTTON HOLDINGS (PVT) LTD and AGRICULTURAL MARKETING AUTHORITY
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

It is clear from the provisions of the Agricultural Marketing Authority Act [Chapter 18:24], and S.I.142 of 2009, that the day to day affairs of the cotton industry are regulated, controlled and administered by the Board and its Technical Committee. To launch an application of this magnitude without citing them (save for purposes of information ...
More

HH198-10 : BIRCH WILLIAMS vs MARIA KATSANDE and DELITTE PRODUCTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: MAWADZE J

The applicant seeks a provisional order in the following terms:-“Terms of the provisional order granted1. Respondents be and are hereby ordered to forthwith hand over a property listed in Annexture 'B' to the founding affidavit to the applicant upon service of this order.1(a) In the event of the respondents refusing ...
More

HH128-10 : SILVERTON ESTATES (PVT) LTD and MICHAEL CHARLES JAHME vs IGNATIOUS KAMBA and PROSPER SITHOLE and SAMUEL ZUZE and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

However, the evidence given by the applicants does not link any acts of spoliation to the respondents. The first, second, and third respondents deny any involvement in the events narrated by the applicants. The applicants have not said they saw any of these three respondents with this group of youths. All they say is that they ...
More

HH133-10 : JAYESH SHAH vs AIR ZIMBABWE CORPORATION
Ruled By: KUDYA J

It seems to me that the averment in the exception that the plaintiff sued the wrong party was properly taken.
More

HH133-10 : JAYESH SHAH vs AIR ZIMBABWE CORPORATION
Ruled By: KUDYA J

The amendment does not fulfil the requirements for a joinder which are contemplated by Order 13 Rule 85 of the Rules of Court. The plaintiff failed to demonstrate both some common question of law or fact, and some entitlement to the relief claimed, that arises from transactions performed by both the defendant and Air ...
More

HH203-10 : SHEPHERD MURAHWI and DEBORAH MURAHWI and PETER SIGAUKE and OTHERS vs MS MAGWENZI and ARROSUM CONSTRUCTION (PVT) LTD and DIVINE HOMES (PVT) LTD and NICANOR ENTERPRISES (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: BERE J

Until this matter was brought to court for argument the applicants did not know of the existence of the fifth respondent and its interest in the property. By applying for joinder, the fifth respondent has advertised its interest in the property to the whole world and I do not see how this temporary interdict ...
More

HH212-10 : MAXWELL MUTOKO vs CHARITY MUKURO (In her capacity of executor in the estate late Jayison Mukuro) and THE MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT
Ruled By: CHITAKUNYE J

As if that was not enough, in his heads of argument, the applicant never addressed the issue at all. It was only in his viva voce submissions in court that counsel for the applicant referred to the issue of the first family as the basis for the locus standi. But surely being a son ...
More

HH227-10 : MIKE MAKOPE vs GEOFFREY DZUMBUNU and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS N.O. and MINISTER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA J

The plaintiff issued summons in which he claims for an order setting aside the cancellation of an Agreement of Sale between him and the first defendant and an order for specific performance for the delivery of the property, being a flat called Block 12, Room 93, Mufakose Flats.He later, by consent, amended his claim by adding ...
More

HH230-10 : KWIK-PAK (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs EDWARD MASHIRINGWANI and SHEPHERD MAKONI
Ruled By: KUDYA J

The preliminary issues The first respondent raised three preliminary issues. The first was that the application was defective for the non-joinder of the acquiring authority. In my view, the non-joinder of the acquiring authority was not fatal to the application for the reason that the applicant sought relief against the parties it alleged had forcibly removed it ...
More

HH234-10 : RODGERS MADANGURE vs SHATO LUFEYI and DAYNDALE ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LIMITED and MUGEJO MAKONI
Ruled By: GOWORA J

The applicant has applied to be joined as a party to the proceedings in respect of which PATEL J granted a temporary interdict and that is, in my view, the appropriate dispute that needs to be determined between the parties as it is dealing with the parties' rights to occupy the claims.
More

HH240-10 : DOREEN SAGANDIRA vs PATRICK SAGANDIRA
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA J

It would also not be competent for the court to include in the matrimonial estate the Mazda B1600 registration number AAM 1146 which the plaintiff claims was purchased by the parties but was registered by the defendant in his brother's name without her consent. The said brother is not a party in these proceedings.
More

HH244-10 : JARVIS MUDZENGERERE vs ESTATE LATE JACKSON JEKERA (As represented by Japson Jekera ) and CHITUNGWIZA MUNICIPALITY and HEZEKIA MUZOPA
Ruled By: CHITAKUNYE J

In proceeding with his case, the plaintiff gave evidence after which the third defendant gave evidence. In his evidence, the plaintiff explained how he paid for the house after which the late Jackson Jekera and himself approached the second respondent for transfer. Transfer was not effected due to the fact that he was not on ...
More

View Appeal
HH273-10 : WYNINA (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs MBCA BANK LIMITED
Ruled By: PATEL J

Additionally, and in any event, it would be quite incompetent to decide this point without the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe having been joined as a party to these proceedings.
More

HB02-11 : MELUSI NDLOVU vs P D S INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

The applicant did not join the new tenant as a party, which was a serious non-joinder….,.
More

HB03-10 : SITHEMBILE SIBANDA vs PUMULO SAYELA and ESTATE LATE MFAKAZI NDLOVU and PLUMTREE TOWN COUNCIL and ASSISTANT MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT, BULAWAYO
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

The first defendant…., was married to one Mfakazi Dennis Ndlovu who died at Plumtree on 4 October 2001. She was the surviving spouse of Mfakazi Dennis Ndlovu and sole beneficiary of his estate. By virtue of being married to the deceased in his life time she is also known as Pumulo Mulemba Ndlovu. In his lifetime, ...
More

Back Main menu