Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Costs re: Self Actors, Witness Expenses and Compensation to Third Parties for Legal Advice Rendered to Self-Actors

HB179-11 : SAMUEL KUFANDADA vs SUPERINTENDANT PILATE MOYO and CHIEF SUPERINTANDANT MATANGE and SUPERITENDANT MOYO and SUPERINTENDANT ZULU and COMMISSIONER GENERAL POLICE
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

1….,. 2. …,. 3. …,. 4. The respondents shall bear proved costs, if any, incurred by the applicant.
More

SC40-19 : SHINGIRAI PHILIP KATSANDE vs ANGELINA KATSANDE (NEE NYAHEMWA)
Ruled By: PATEL JA

Because of the applicant's failure to prosecute the matter diligently and timeously, he should be mulcted with an order for costs on a punitive scale, such costs to be paid as a pre-condition to his being allowed to proceed with his appeal. Indeed, the applicant himself was not averse to such order being made so as to ...
More

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

This is a review of taxation in terms of Rule 56 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018.The Rule provides that any party aggrieved by the taxation of a bill of costs shall give notice of review setting out his or her grounds of objection. Thereafter, the matter shall be set ...
More

SC57-20 : TENDAI BONDE vs NATIONAL FOODS LIMITED
Ruled By: GARWE JA, BHUNU JA and MAKONI JA

This is a court application filed in terms of Rule 449 of the High Court Rules, 1971 in which the applicant seeks an order rescinding the order granted by this court on 27 November 2019. In terms of the Supreme Court Rules, 2018 the High Court Rules apply whenever there ...
More

SC25-09 : AIDAN BECKFORD vs ELIZABETH BECKFORD
Ruled By: SANDURA JA, ZIYAMBI JA and GWAUNZA JA

On 20 December 2006 the High Court granted a decree of divorce and other ancillary relief in a divorce action in which Mr Beckford was the plaintiff and Mrs Beckford the defendant. Aggrieved by part of the Order, Mr Beckford appealed to this Court. The Notice of Appeal, in relevant ...
More

SC82-20 : YAKUB MAHOMED vs JOHN BREDENKAMP and TANYARADZWA MASHAYAMOMBE N.O.
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, MAKONI JA and BERE JA

Rule 307 provides:“With a view to affording the party who has been awarded an order for costs a full indemnity for all costs reasonably incurred by him in relation to this claim or defence, and to ensure that all costs shall be borne by the party against whom such order ...
More

HH485-16 : PUWAYI CHIUTSI LEGAL PRACTITIONERS vs THE REGISTRAR OF THE HIGH COURT and THE TAXING OFFICER
Ruled By: CHIGUMBA J

The taxation of a Bill of Costs is provided for in terms of Order 38 Rule 307 of the Rules of the High Court 1971, as follows:“ORDER 38 TAXATION OF COSTS AND REVIEW OF TAXATION307. Costs allowedWith a view to affording the party who has been awarded an order for ...
More

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

By reason of Order 38 Rule 307, the Taxing Officer may allow all such costs, charges, and expenses as appear to him to have been necessary or proper for the attainment of justice or for defending the rights of any party....,.The purpose of an award of costs to a successful ...
More

HH97-17 : IGNATIUS MASAMBA vs SECRETARY – JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION
Ruled By: MANGOTA J

The applicant abused the court and its process in an inexcusable manner. His conduct should be visited with serious censure....,.The application is, accordingly, dismissed with costs on a higher scale.
More

HH283-17 : IGNATIUS MASAMBA vs THE SECRETARY – JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION and MERCY GORONGOZA
Ruled By: CHITAPI J

For abusing the judge and court as well as for unnecessarily citing the Judicial Services Commission in circumstances where the reasons thereof are not clear other than to bring it to the Commission's attention how the applicant had little regard for the judge, a punitive costs order as prayed for ...
More

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

HERBSTEIN and Van WINSEN in The Civil Practice of the High Court Vol. 2, 5th ed…, succinctly set out the purpose of an award of costs as follows:“…, to indemnify him for the expense to which he has been put through having been unjustly compelled to initiate or defend litigation, ...
More

HH978-15 : IGNATIUS MASAMBA vs SECRETARY-JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION
Ruled By: MUNANGATI-MANONGWA J

Whilst it is a constitutional right to be able to approach the courts to obtain relief, self-actors must know that the practice of law is a very specialised area which requires deep knowledge and skill. Simply reading law books at random does not equip one with the requisite knowledge. Legal ...
More

HB189-18 : CLAUDIUS MANAMELA and BRIGHTON NANGA and SIBONGILE MANAMELA vs ROSEWELL ZULU and APOSTOLIC FAITH MISSION OF AFRICA INTL and CLEMENT NYATHI and APOSTOLIC FAITH MISSION OF AFRICA
Ruled By: MABHIKWA J

The court will re-iterate my brother MATHONSI J's warning, that, a litigant or litigants cannot be allowed to enjoy filing frivolous applications at the same time abusing the court and other litigants.This court will add a warning, to the first applicant in particular, that, it cannot allow a situation where ...
More

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

The applicants asked for costs on a higher scale.It was contended that the applicants have had to approach this court on numerous occasions because of the respondent's defiance of court orders. This has resulted in additional and unwarranted expenses to the applicants.The court has been asked to express it displeasure ...
More

SC11-21 : TENDAI BONDE vs NATIONAL FOODS LTD and LOVEJOY NYANDORO [as Chairman of Appeals Committee] and CHIPO NHETA [as Chairman of Works Council]
Ruled By: GUVAVA JA

In respect to costs, the first respondent sought costs in the event that it was successful. I find no basis to deny the first respondent its costs as prayed.
More

SC91-21 : ELPHAS MAPHISA vs CITY OF BULAWAYO
Ruled By: GUVAVA JA, UCHENA JA and CHITAKUNYE AJA

The appellant's appeal has no merit. The appellant has unfortunately continued with vexatious litigation. The respondent is entitled to costs at the legal practitioner and client scale.The appeal is dismissed with costs on the legal practitioner and client scale.
More

SC93-21 : RINOS TERERA vs GEORGE LOCK and CK HOLLAND t/a HOLLAND ESTATE AGENT and ZIMBABWE HOUSING COMPANY (PVT) LTD and THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: CHITAKUNYE AJA

The respondents counsel, in seeking costs on the higher scale, alluded to the litigious nature of the applicant in spite of extant court orders against him which he has not challenged and the fact that the property in question was transferred to the third respondent in 2016 to his knowledge.Transfer ...
More

CC05-21 : RITA MBATHA vs CONFEDERATION OF ZIMBABWE INDUSTRIES and THE SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: GARWE AJCC, GOWORA AJCC and PATEL AJCC

The first respondent has prayed that the applicant be mulcted with an order for costs.In constitutional matters, it is not the norm that costs be awarded against the unsuccessful litigant. The first respondent has not suggested that the applicant is guilty of vexatious conduct or an abuse of court process. ...
More

Back Main menu

Categories

Back to top