Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Costs re: Approach

HB01-12 : NKULULEKO MABHENA vs P.G. INDUSTRIES (ZIM) LIMITED AND P.G. ZIMBOARD PRODUCTS (PVT) LTD AND ANOTHER
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

It must also be mentioned that the applicant's attitude did not help the situation. He was belligerent and did not want to co-operate. He was reported to have staged sit-ins and disrupting the work-place...,. However, the above must not be taken as an excuse to demote the applicant. It is only relevant when considering the ...
More

Appealed
HH55-12 : STREAMSLEIGH INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs AUTOBAND INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: BERE J

The question of costs is largely at the discretion of the court despite what the parties' desire. But the discretion of the court must be judiciously exercised. Kruger Bros and Wasserman vs Ruskin 1918 AD 63…,.
More

SC11-12 : JESTINA MUKOKO vs THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, MALABA DCJ, SANDURA JA, ZIYAMBI JA and GARWE JA

Costs are in the discretion of the Court.
More

HH74-10 : CHARLES MAKANI vs GERTRUDE MAKANI (NEE ZIMONDI)
Ruled By: GUVAVA J

The general rule is that costs follow the cause. If a party is successful then that party is entitled to their costs. The plaintiff in this case has been fairly successful, and, in my view, should be awarded his costs.
More

HB34-09 : NOKUKHANYA MOYO vs ROBERT MOYO
Ruled By: BERE J

The issue of costs is largely at the discretion of the court. But, that discretion must be judiciously exercised. Kruger Brothers and Wasserman v Ruskin 1918 AD.
More

HH82-10 : MILRITE FARMING (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs ENOCK PORUSINGAZI and S ZUZE and THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTELEMENT and THREE OTHERS
Ruled By: HLATSHWAYO J

The first respondent is entitled to judgment..., with costs, nothing having been submitted to sway the court to depart from the ordinary rule that costs follow the outcome. The second to sixth respondents, inclusive, did not oppose the present application, opting to abide by the decision of this court, and are thus not affected by the ...
More

HH228-10 : CAROLINE MABAIRE vs SHEPHERD JAILOSI and THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS
Ruled By: KUDYA J

Costs are always in the discretion of the court. The plaintiff has succeeded in receiving an award of damages for loss of support. She is entitled to her costs of suit.
More

HH277-10 : BENCHILL INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD vs BATTERY WORLD (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: KUDYA J

The defendant prayed for costs based on the Law Society tariff. The definition, justification or legality of such a scale of costs was not argued before me. Costs being in the discretion of the court, I see no reason why the defendant should not be awarded its costs on the ordinary scale.
More

HH364-13 : ENNETY GUNDA vs OLIVER MASOMERA N.O. and TSITSI GUNDA and LANGTON MASHIRI and THE MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: MAWADZE J

As regards costs, my view is that the issue of costs should follow the result….,. 1….,. 2. The plaintiff shall bear the costs for the first, second and third defendants.
More

SC17-13 : EVANS TAPFUMANEYI MUNYATI vs GODFREY MUGAYI
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, GARWE JA and OMERJEE AJA

There is one further matter that requires consideration. That matter relates to the question of costs. The appellant did not appeal against the order that he pays the costs on the higher scale. Although the claim for such costs was made, no justification was given before the court a quo for such an ...
More

HB04-14 : TRISTAR INSURANCE COMPANY (PVT) LTD vs WILBERT CHIKANYA
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Counsel for the respondent submitted that the applicant shall bear costs of this application irrespective of whether or not it is successful. I cannot accede to such a request as there is no reason why this court should depart from the well established rule that costs follow the result.
More

View Appeal
SC50-16 : ZIMBABWE MINING COMPANY (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs OUTSOURCE SECURITY (PRIVATE) LIMITED and DEPUTY SHERIFF, GWANDA and WILLEM SMIT and S. DHLIWAYO and A.P. GLEDENING
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, UCHENA JA and BERE AJA

Costs were not ordered against the first and third respondents as they had, from the onset, indicated that they would abide by the decision of the court.
More

SC26-17 : SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF ZIMBABWE vs PHIBION GWATIDZO N.O. and FIRST TRANSFER SECRETARIES (PRIVATE) LIMITED and MAST STOCK BROKERS PL and MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT N.O.
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and MAVANGIRA AJA

The costs ordinarily follow the outcome and nothing has been submitted to merit a departure from this rule.
More

HH329-13 : RICHARD JAMBO vs CHURCH OF THE PROVINCE OF CENTRAL AFRICA and ANGLICAN DIOCESE OF MASVINGO and THE DEPUTY SHERIFF CHIVHU N.O.
Ruled By: GUVAVA J

With regards to costs, it was my view that the applicant should pay the respondents costs as not only did he cite a non-existent persona but he sought to hide material facts from the court. The application itself did not comply with the Rules and was clearly not urgent but filed merely to ...
More

HH28-15 : LINDIWE CHIFAMBA vs ELIJAH CHIFAMBA
Ruled By: TSANGA J and CHITAKUNYE J

The purpose of awarding…, costs to a successful litigant in civil matters is to recompense them for expenses that have been incurred initiating or defending litigation.
More

SC64-18 : MISHECK MUBVUMBI vs CITY OF HARARE
Ruled By: MAKARAU JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and PATEL JA

Regarding costs, no basis exists to depart from the general rule that they follow the cause.
More

Appealed
SC70-18 : YUNUS AHMED vs DOCKING STATION SAFARIS (PRIVATE) LIMITED t/a CC SALES
Ruled By: BHUNU JA

There being no reason to depart from the general rule that costs follow the result, the general rule shall prevail.
More

HB169-16 : THE SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE vs DEVELOPMENT TRUST OF INSIZA and ZIMBABWE ASSOCIATION OF DAIRY FARMERS
Ruled By: TAKUVA J

As regards costs, the general rule is that once the court finds that the claimant has failed to establish its claim an order for costs ought to be made. See Hallsbury, Laws of England, Simonds Vol 122…, where it was stated; “The ordinary rule in all Divisions of the High Court now is that where the stakeholder has ...
More

HB235-16 : ESTATE LATE MOSES KANHUKAMWE (represented by Winnie Mudzinganyama curator bonis) vs CBZ BANK LTD and I.Q. MARKETING (PVT) LTD and THE ADDITIONAL SHERIFF – BULAWAYO
Ruled By: TAKUVA J

Costs are discretionary. In terms of Rule 240 of the High Court Rules 1971, the court has a discretion as to an award of an order for costs. The rule states; “240 Granting of Order At the conclusion of the hearing or thereafter the court may refuse the application or may grant the order applied for, including a provisional order, or ...
More

HH217-17 : NAISON SEKERAMAYI and OTHERS vs MASTER OF HIGH COURT and PROVINCIAL MAGISTRATE, HARARE and EASTER DZWOWA and YARADZO MUNANGATI MANONGWA (Executrix Dative in Estate Lovemore Sekeramayi)
Ruled By: ZHOU J

As for the costs, there is no reason why these should not follow the result. The third respondent has strenuously opposed the relief which is being sought by the applicants even though the decision which was sought to be set aside is that of the first respondent….,. 1….,. 2….,. 3….,. 4. The third respondent shall pay the costs of this application.
More

HMA06-18 : PHILEMON MUTANGIRI and NYIKADZINO MUTATI and LYTON KAUNDA vs LEONARD MUTEMA t/a LEONARD TRADING and F. NAGO N.O. PROVINCIAL MAGISTRATE
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

The general rule is that costs follow the event. The loser pays the winner's costs. However, it is also the rule that costs are entirely in the discretion of the court. This discretion is exercised judiciously, not whimsically.
More

HH461-15 : PATTERSON TIMBA vs REGGIE SARUCHERA N.O. and RESERVES BANK OF ZIMBABWE and NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY AUTHORITY and RENNAISSANCE FINANCIAL HOLDINGS LTD and RENAISSANCE MERCHANT BANK LTD
Ruled By: MAKONI J

The learned authors HERBSTEIN and Van WINSEN in The Civil Practice of the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa, 5ed, Vol 2…, stated the following: “The award of costs is a matter wholly within the discretion of the court, but this is a judicial discretion and must be exercised on grounds upon which a ...
More

Appealed
SC17-19 : ECONET WIRELESS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY and COMMISSIONER GENERAL
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, GOWORA JA and MAVANGIRA JA

No justification has been laid before this Court to depart from the legal position that costs will follow the cause.
More

SC20-19 : GRACE SHURO vs MOLLY CHIURAISE and CITY OF MASVINGO
Ruled By: GARWE JA, HLATSHWAYO JA and BHUNU JA

COSTS I am of the view that since the first respondent has largely been successful, a costs order in her favour should ensue….,. 1….,. 2. The appellant is to pay the costs of the appeal.
More

SC27-19 : SYNOHYDRO ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD vs TOWNSEND ENTERPRISES (PVT) LTD and DAVID WHATMAN N.O. and THE SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE N.O.
Ruled By: MAKARAU JA

The applicant has succeeded in this application. It is entitled to its costs. No argument was advanced by either side as to why the ordinary incidence of costs following the cause should not apply.
More

SC28-19 : EMMANUEL MASVIKENI vs NATIONAL BLOOD SERVICE ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: GWAUNZA JA, GARWE JA and MAVANGIRA JA

There being no reason advanced why this Court must hold otherwise, costs will follow the cause.
More

HH43-06 : ZIMBABWE DEVELOPMENT BANK vs NAGA SALONS and NYARAI CHIWAURA and BETTY CHIWAURA
Ruled By: KUDYA J

There are two types of legal costs. These are Attorney and Client and party and party. The use of the words costs, charges incurred or paid may relate to either Attorney/Client costs or party and party costs….,. Thus, while it is clear that parties to a contract can agree on the inclusion of Attorney and Client ...
More

HH270-17 : ENGEN PETROLEUM [PVT] LTD vs INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT BANK OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

Although in their papers both parties sought the costs of this application, at the hearing none of them persisted. However, none of them expressly abandoned them either. Counsel for the respondent merely prayed for the withdrawal of the application. Counsel for the applicant said he had no instructions to do otherwise than press on with it. The general rule is ...
More

HH192-15 : JAMILA MOKBEL vs HASSAN MOKBEL
Ruled By: UCHENA J

Costs are in the court's discretion.
More

HH197-15 : ROBSON MAKONI vs THE COLD CHAIN (PRIVATE) LIMITED t/a SEA HARVEST
Ruled By: CHIGUMBA J

This court respectfully declines to exercise its discretion and grant punitive costs against the applicant as advocated for by counsel for the respondent. Accordingly, the application is dismissed with costs on an ordinary scale.
More

HH198-15 : MUCAL ENTERPRISES vs STEWARD BANK
Ruled By: TSANGA J

The defendant seeks that costs be awarded on a higher scale especially on the grounds that the plaintiff had ample time to put all its evidence together in preparing for trial, and, as such, it has been put through an unnecessary expense. Costs, in general, recompense a successful party for expenses to which he has been put ...
More

SC07-20 : FARAI BWATIKONA ZIZHOU vs THE TAXING OFFICER and RITA MARQUE MBATHA
Ruled By: MAKARAU JA

The applicant has prayed for costs. I have no basis for denying him these as costs ordinarily follow the cause save where, in the discretion of the court, a different order of costs is deemed just and appropriate. There are no circumstances in this matter justifying a departure from the ...
More

SC10-20 : ZIMBABWE SCHOOL EXAMINATIONS COUNCIL vs VICTOR MUKOMEKA (on behalf of a minor Charmaine Mukomeka) and CHINGASIYENI GOVHATI (on behalf of a minor Anesu Govhati)
Ruled By: PATEL JA, BHUNU JA and BERE JA

As regards costs, there appears to be no reason to depart from the usual norm that costs should follow the cause.
More

Appealed
SC52-20 : NEWTON DONGO vs JOYTINDRA NAIK and HEMENT NAIK and BABNIK INVESTMENT PL and CLINVEST INVESTMENT PL and MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS OFFICE
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, GOWORA JA and MAKONI JA

It is settled law that costs are at the discretion of the court. The award can only be set aside where the discretion was not exercised judiciously.
More

HB56-15 : GLADYS KARENGWA vs ALBERT MPOFU
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

The awarding of costs is at the discretion of the court.
More

SC83-20 : ARISTON HOLDINGS LIMITED vs THE COMPETITION AND TARIFF COMMISSION OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, PATEL JA and MAKONI JA

As regards costs there is no reason to depart from the general rule that costs follow the cause.
More

SC86-20 : CONSTANTINE CHIWENGA vs MARRY MUBAIWA
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, GARWE JA and BHUNU JA

It is trite that costs follow the results.
More

Appealed
SC87-20 : CECK ENTERPRISES PL vs MARIA SITHOLE and MATHIAS SITHOLE (represented by TAKURA MUKWESHA as Executrix Dative) and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS and MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, HLATSHWAYO JA and BHUNU JA

This is an appeal against the whole judgement of the High Court handed down on 14 March 2018 dismissing the appellant's counter claim against the first respondent.FACTUAL BACKGROUNDThe first and the second respondents were married and later on divorced. They owned a property, namely, Stand No.2395 Glen View (“the property”). ...
More

HH928-15 : ABC BANK LIMITED vs MACKIE DIAMONDS BVA and THE DEPUTY SHERIFF HARARE, N.O.
Ruled By: HUNGWE J

The South African Constitutional Court, in Ferreira v Levin NO and Others 1996 (2) SA 621 (CC), said…,:“The Supreme Court has, over the years, developed a flexible approach to costs which proceeds from two basic principles; the first being that the award of costs, unless expressly otherwise enacted, is in ...
More

SC105-20 : CHRISTMAS MAZARIRE vs THE RETRENCHMENT BOARD and OLD MUTUAL SHARED SERVICES (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MAKARAU JA, GOWORA JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

Costs of this appeal will follow the cause. I see no reason for departing from this general position in this appeal.
More

SC107-20 : COLCOM FOODS LIMITED vs TARUVA TARUVA
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, GUVAVA JA and MATHONSI JA

Regarding the issue of costs, I see no reason why the costs should not follow the result.
More

HH390-18 : MIDLANDS STATE UNIVERSITY vs ALOIS MATONGO
Ruled By: MUZOFA J

Costs are always in the discretion of the court and generally follow the event. I see no reason to depart from this approach.
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 issue of costs is in the court's discretion. That discretion must be exercised in a manner that does not discourage litigants from approaching the courts.
More

HH520-18 : AIR NAMIBIA (PROPRIETARY) LTD vs CHENJERAI MAWUMBA and JULIANA MAGOMBEDZE and FADZAI MAWUMBA and RUTENDO MUWUMBA and TADIWANASHE MAWUMBA (minors represented by father & natural guardian)
Ruled By: CHITAPI J

The general rule is that costs follow the result. This notwithstanding, costs are awarded in the discretion of the court, and, as with any other discretion, it is exercised judiciously.The principles which the court considers include; the conduct of the parties before and during the hearing; whether a party has ...
More

Appealed
HH46-09 : MATTHEW MBUNDIRE vs TYRONE SIM BUTTRESS
Ruled By: CHATUKUTA J

When a defendant is absolved from the instance he should be regarded as being the successful party, and the plaintiff should be ordered to pay the defendant's costs unless there are good reasons for ordering otherwise: see General Wholesale Suppliers (Pvt) Ltd v Aims Distributors 1975 (1) SA 600 (RA)…, ...
More

Appealed
HH92-07 : PHAROAH B. MUSKWE vs DOUGLAS NYAJINA and MUNHUWEI G.T. and MINISTER OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT, NATIONAL HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT N.O.
Ruled By: KUDYA J

Costs are always in the discretion of the court.
More

View Appeal
HH665-16 : OLIVER MASOMERA (as Executor Dative of Estate late Brian James Rhodes) vs GIDEON HWEMENDE and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHITAPI J

Costs are in the discretion of the court, albeit, the general rule being that costs follow the result.
More

SC16-21 : GML EXPLOSIVE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs LACKSON GONO AND 29 OTHERS
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA JA, MAKONI JA and MATHONSI JA

On the issue of costs, they normally follow the result. It has not been suggested that the usual position should be departed from and I see no reason why that should be resorted to.
More

SC21-21 : ZIMBABWE UNITED PASSENGER COMPANY vs BEAULAR MASHINGE
Ruled By: MAKARAU JA, GOWORA JA and BERE JA

In view of the fact that there is no justification for departing from the general position that costs follow the cause, I must dismiss the appeal with an accompanying order of costs.
More

HH842-19 : BARIADIE INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD vs PUWAYI CHIUTSI and TENDAI MASHAMHANDA and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS and SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE N.O. and ELLIOT ROGERS
Ruled By: CHITAPI J

I need to lastly deal with the question of costs.Costs are in the discretion of the court with the general rule being that costs follow the event. This means that if the application should be dismissed the applicant must bear the costs of suit.The circumstances of this case are however ...
More

Back Main menu

Categories

Back to top