Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Dirty Hands Principle and the Doctrine of Obedience of the Law Until its Lawful Invalidation or Repeal re: Approach

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

HH18-12 : PIONEER TRANSPORT (PVT) LTD vs DELTA CORPORATION LTD and DAVID LESLIE CRUTTEDEN
Ruled By: GOWORA J

On 1 January 2003, the applicant and the first respondent executed an agreement for the “supply of primary beverage transport services.”In terms of clause 8 of the agreement, the first respondent, Delta, appointed the services of the applicant, Pioneer, to distribute and deliver products on its behalf to various destinations.In ...
More

SC18-12 : RONI MASEKESA vs KINGDOM FINANCIAL HOLDINGS
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA

In any event, the court has a discretion as to whether or not to hear a party allegedly in contempt.
More

HH205-10 : AFRICA CONSOLIDATED RESOURCES (PVT) LIMITED AND FOUR OTHERS vs MINISTER OF MINES AND MINING DEVELOPMENT AND TWO OTHERS
Ruled By: HUNGWE J

As I understood it, the first point raised on behalf of the applicants was that this court should not allow the respondents any audience since they come to this court with dirty hands. They had flagrantly and contemptuously refused to comply with the Supreme Court order of 25 January 2010. Counsel for the applicants put ...
More

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

Our courts have made it abundantly clear that a party's dissatisfaction or disagreement with a court order is no defence to contempt proceedings.In Whata v Whata 1994 (2) ZLR 277 (S)…, GUBBAY CJ quoted with approval what was held in S v Mushonga 1994 (1) ZLR 296 (S) that:“Generally, a ...
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

A person who believes that an order is invalid must generally comply with that order. He may seek to have the order set aside by way of review or appeal: see Capital Radio (Pvt) Ltd v Minister of Information Ors 2000 (2) ZLR 289 (HC)…, and Whata ...
More

HH115-09 : GIBSON CHAMBOKO and MR CHAMBOKO SNR and CHANCE RWODZI vs PATRICK STOOKS and P J STOOKS (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MAKONI J

On 1 June 2009 this court granted an order that case numbers HC2190/09 and HC2224/09 be heard urgently and simultaneously, consequent to an application that the matters be heard on an urgent basis and simultaneously. For ease of reference, I will refer to the parties as they are cited herein in both matters. The brief background to ...
More

HH03-10 : ESTHER MWANYISA vs ENETI JUMBO and ISABEL SAMURIWO and MTIKUMBURA MOFFAT and THE CITY OF HARARE and THE MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT and ANOTHER
Ruled By: MAKARAU JP

Finally, and still in limine, the first respondent argued that the applicant had approached the court with dirty hands as she had the property transferred into her name despite the existence of an order prohibiting her from so doing. Finally, I note that the first respondent has strenuously argued that the applicant ...
More

HH232-10 : ANDREW RICHARD BRUFORD vs THE ATTORNEY GENERAL and THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and MAGISTRATE JARABINI and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

Counsel for the second, third and fifth respondents argued that the applicant must first comply with the magistrate's order of eviction before approaching this court. Since the applicant has approached this court with dirty hands he should not be heard.
More

HH33-11 : ALAN McGREGOR vs NEHEMIAH SABURI and ATTORNEY GENERAL and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

Counsel for the second respondent's further contention is that such an owner or occupier who refuses to vacate such land in clear violation of the law cannot seek recourse in this court. His hands are dirty and for that reason he should not be entertained. I agree with that contention.
More

HH45-13 : OLIVER MUSHUMA vs SWEEN MUSHONGA
Ruled By: HLATSHWAYO J and MAWADZE J

The last point the respondent took in limine was that the respondent had approached the court a quo with dirty hands and should not have been heard - commonly referred to as the dirty hands principle. This principle was well summed up by BARTLET J in Deputy Sheriff Harare v Mahleza Anor 1997 ...
More

HH97-13 : SAMSON HLANGANAYI MHLANGA vs PRISILA MAKUYANA and DEPUTY SHERIFF- HARARE
Ruled By: MANGOTA J

This matter came before me as an urgent chamber application which the applicant instituted against the first and the second respondents. The applicant is the former husband of the first respondent. The two were married in terms of Customary Law in 1976, and, in 1983, the parties solemnised their marriage in terms of the Marriage Act ...
More

HH101-11 : HERENTALS COLLEGE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs RELEASE POWER INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED and ONIYAS GUMBO and MR CHINYAMUCHIKO (In his capacity as the Headmaster of Cold Comfort Primary School)
Ruled By: BERE J

THE CONCEPT OF DIRTY HANDS It was further argued by the respondents counsel that the applicant is the one that had caused mayhem at the institution and then rushed to court with the instant application. The argument was that the applicant had created the situation that it was now calling for the court's intervention. Counsel's ...
More

HH351-13 : SOVEREIGN EMPOWERMENT CENTRE and HACHIM KITCHENS PL and KINGDOM EMBASSY ZIM and STUARTSON INVESTMENTS PL vs OLD MUTUAL INVESTMENT GROUP PROPERTY INVESTMENT ZIM PL and THE SHERIFF (N.O.)
Ruled By: MANGOTA J

(iii) The third matter which the first respondent raised in limine was, or is, that the applicants' hands are dirty and that, because of that stated matter, the court should not hear them. It argued that a party which is seeking to obtain relief from the court must not only have but must also come ...
More

HH358-13 : TRY NYAMUKONDA and LEN SMIT vs SOMEDEN INVESTMENTS T/A SABLE MINING AFRICA LIMITED and SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT
Ruled By: MANGOTA J

The first respondent's second submission in limine was that the applicants were approaching the court with dirty hands. It argued that the court should refuse to hear them on that basis. It stated, in support of its position on this matter, that the applicants were illegally retaining possession of vehicles which belonged to it. The word ...
More

HB59-13 : COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF POLICE vs FARAI BASIL NYAPOKOTO
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

3. Dirty Hands The applicant is a party to the proceedings still pending in court. The applicant purports to assume liability of a party who is in contempt of a court order. The applicant cannot be heard until he has purged his contempt. There is clear evidence that the court order has been ignored and violated ...
More

HB134-11 : DAVISON MASINA vs KHALIL GAIBIE and SHABEIRA GAIBIE and DEPUTY SHERIFF (N.O.)
Ruled By: NDOU J

“Dirty hands issue” As alluded to above, the order required the applicant to vacate the premises within 48 hours. The order was served on the applicant by the Assistant Deputy Sheriff on 19 August 2011. This application was only filed on 31 August 2011. Despite having known, as at 19 August 2011, of the order ...
More

HH194-14 : GILBERT CHINYA HUNGWE vs HANDINA FAITH HUNGWE
Ruled By: MAWADZE J

Before I deal with the merits of the matter, I shall deal first with the two points in limine raised by counsel for the respondent. I dismissed them and indicated that I will give full reasons in this judgement. The first point in limine taken by the respondent is that the applicant has approached the ...
More

Appealed
SC08-14 : SIMBA MUKAMBIRWA and OTHERS vs THE GOSPEL OF GOD CHURCH INTERNATIONAL 1932
Ruled By: GARWE JA, GOWORA JA and OMERJEE AJA

The respondent in this case, the Gospel of God Church International 1932 (hereinafter referred to as “the Church”) was founded by one Johane Marange in 1932.Since it was founded, the Church has spread to a large portion of the continent. Its headquarters are located in Zimbabwe. The founder is buried ...
More

CC05-15 : TOUR OPERATORS BUSINESS ASSOCIATION OF ZIMBABWE vs MOTOR INSURANCE POOL and ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY and INSURANCE AND PENSIONS COMMISSION and ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JCC, GWAUNZA JCC, GARWE JCC, GOWORA JCC, HLATSHWAYO JCC, PATEL JCC and GUVAVA JCC

It is implored, on behalf of the Tour Operators Business Association of Zimbabwe that the fact that its members have contravened a law does not debar them from approaching a court for relief in respect of any alleged violation of fundamental rights, as is expressly affirmed in section 85(2) of the Constitution, and that the ...
More

SC31-16 : ECONET WIRELESS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs MINISTER OF PUBLIC SERVICE, LABOUR AND SOCIAL WELFARE and REGISTRAR OF LABOUR and NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT COUNCIL FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND ALLIED SERVICES
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and BHUNU JA

The cardinal issue for determination in this case is the appellant's right to be heard vis-a-vis its obligation to obey the law before being heard. In legal parlance, the issue has to do with the application of the age old dirty hands doctrine as determined through the cases and amplified by this Court in ...
More

SC38-16 : MARTIN NHAPATA vs CHRISTOPHER MASWI and MAIDEI MASWI
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA

At the hearing before me, the respondents raised a point in limine, to the effect that the appellant should not be heard since he was approaching the court with dirty hands. This was because, they allege, the applicant had failed, refused and/or neglected to comply with a lawful order of the court and had, ...
More

SC31-10 : COMMERCIAL FARMERS UNION and OTHERS vs THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and CHEDA AJA

…,. There is the principle that a litigant who is acting in open defiance of the law cannot approach a court for assistance. See Associated Newspapers of Zimbabwe (Private) Limited v The Minister of State for Information and Publicity and Ors SC111-04. Indeed, if this point had been raised as a preliminary point, the probabilities ...
More

SC111-04 : ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS OF ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR INFORMATION AND PUBLICITY and MEDIA AND INFORMATION COMMISSION and THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, CHEDA JA, ZIYAMBI JA, MALABA JA and GWAUNZA JA

This judgment determines the Constitutional Court application launched by the applicant in case number SC-7-03 as well as the appeal by the second respondent against the judgment of the Administrative Court in case number SC-359-03. As will appear from the facts, the two cases involve the same parties, except for the first and third ...
More

SC08-16 : CFI RETAIL (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs ERIC MANYIKA
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA and GOWORA JA

The principle of dirty hands governs a situation where a party is under a direct obligation imposed by law to act in a specific manner; which obligation the party deliberately refuses to perform. It is a time honoured principle based on the need for litigants who approach a court of law seeking relief to ...
More

HH228-16 : ANJIN INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD vs THE MINISTER OF MINES & MINING DEVELOPMENT and THE MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS and THE COMMISSIONER-GENERAL OF THE ZIMBABWE REPUBLIC POLICE
Ruled By: MANGOTA J

It is the duty of every person who resides in any country to comply with the laws of the country from which he conducts his business. Where a person whose business interests run in conflict with the laws of the territory from which he conducts his business is adversely affected by his unwholesome conduct vis-à-vis the territory's ...
More

View Appeal
HH193-16 : GRANDWELL HOLDINGS PL vs MINISTER OF MINES and ZIMBABWE MINING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and MARANGE RESOURCES PL and ZIMBABWE CONSOLIDATED DIAMOND COMPANY and MBADA DIAMONDS PL and ANOR
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

The second point in limine was whether respondents two to four had soiled themselves and were coming to court with 'dirty hands', and, therefore, unfit for the court's audience….,. (ii) Whether respondents 2 to 4 were coming to court with 'dirty hands' The issue of 'dirty hands' arose during the course of the proceedings. It is now water ...
More

View Appeal
HH768-15 : NAVAL PHASE FARMING PL and BEACH FARMS PL and TAWANDA NYAMBIRAI vs MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and BERNARD MAKOKOVE and STEPHEN CHIURAYI and MALVERN DZVAIRO
Ruled By: CHIGUMBA J

(b) Dirty hands principle The applicants contend that the respondents have come before this court with dirty hands because of the interdict that was granted against the first and second respondents on 10 February 2002 under case number HC1180A-2002. The third and fourth respondents were not a part of those proceedings. It is common cause that the interdict was granted ...
More

HH343-15 : SOURCE-NET (PVT) LTD and NELSON BANYA and ALFONCE MBIZWO and BERNARD MPOFU vs STEWARD BANK LIMITED and ECONET WIRELESS
Ruled By: MUSAKWA J

It is also contended, by the respondents, that the applicants have approached the court with dirty hands. This is because they wrote to the Sheriff and the police not to execute any order until their contemplated application had been heard. Part of the letters written to the Sheriff and police, in identical fashion, read as follows - “1...,. 2...,. 3. The ...
More

SC51-18 : CONSTRUCTION RESOURCES AFRICA (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs CENTRAL AFRICAN BUILDING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, GARWE JA and PATEL JA

Point in limine Before addressing the merits, counsel for the applicant pointed out that on 30 June 2010 the High Court had issued an order prohibiting Mr. Paul from continuing to act for the respondent in this matter because of his irregular conduct. However, in defiance of that order, Mr. Paul filed a notice of opposition to ...
More

HH27-18 : SAMSON MEKI vs AIR ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD and AIR ZIMBABWE HOLDINGS (PVT) LTD and COMMERCIAL BANK OF ZIMBABWE LTD
Ruled By: HUNGWE J

1. Whether the respondents are in contempt of court and therefore should not be heard The applicant contends that because the two respondents have not complied with the order of this court compelling them to pay the amount awarded to him by the arbitrator, the respondents should be held to be in contempt of court and therefore ...
More

HH139-15 : MANLINE FREIGHT (PTY) LTD vs PETER KANENGONI and OTHERS
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

The respondents' last point in limine was that the applicant had approached the court with dirty hands allegedly in that it had forcibly retrieved the trucks and their cargo and had placed physical barriers, including vicious guard dogs, to block the respondents' access to the vehicles. They claimed that some of their own assets, including personal apparel, ...
More