Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Unjust Enrichment re: Approach, Colore Officii or Extortion by Colour of Office, Equality and Equity Considerations

HB201-11 : CABAT TRADE & FINANCE (PTY) LTD and SECURITY MILLS (PTY) LTD vs THE MOVEMENT FOR DEMOCRATIC CHANGE (MDC-T)
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

In the alternative, the claim was for payment of the sum of ZAR4,627,863=93 being the amount by which defendant had been unjustly enriched at the expense of the second plaintiff as the result of the second plaintiff manufacturing and delivering goods valued at ZAR4,627,863=93 to the defendant at the defendant's special instance and request on ...
More

HH311-14 : MAXWELL MATSVIMBO SIBANDA vs GYWNNE ANN STEVENSON and THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: DUBE J

No basis for unjust enrichment has been laid.
More

SC19-14 : DAVID TENDAYI MATIPANO vs GOLD DRIVEN INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA and GOWORA JA

DID THE RESPONDENT ESTABLISH A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR UNJUSTIFIED ENRICHMENT, AND WAS THE MERE PAYMENT OF A SUM SAID NOT TO BE WHOLLY DUE GIVE RISE TO AN ENFORECEABLE CLAIM It is contended, on behalf of the Deputy Sheriff, that, even if the High Court had been correct in its finding that the matter ...
More

HH35-16 : SHINGISAI MARYLN NYAMUKUSA vs GILBERT KARENGA MASWERA
Ruled By: UCHENA J

Unjust enrichment is easier to prove, as all the plaintiff has to prove is that she contributed something, which, if not shared equitably, will leave the defendant enriched at her expense. In the case of Industrial Equity v Walker 1996 (1) ZLR 269 (H)…, BARTLETT J…, said; “I have already found that a general ...
More

SC70-07 : MICHAEL TAYLOR vs HEATHER MARGARET TAYLOR
Ruled By: CHEDA JA, ZIYAMBI JA and GARWE JA

Unjust enrichment now forms a cause of action in terms of our common law. See Industrial Equity v Walker 1996 (1) ZLR 269 (H).
More

HH260-15 : DR PARTSON ZVANDASARA vs BELVEDERE NURSING HOME (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

The plaintiff is a medical doctor, a gynaecologist, and a professor at the University of Zimbabwe. He boasts that he is a founder member and majority shareholder of the defendant, a maternity institution he is suing for $50,000, being money he says he paid to a creditor of the defendant ...
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

HH44-09 : BLESSMOE CHANAKIRA and AUXILIA DANAYI MYNYEZA vs MAI KAI REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT TRUST and BERNARD MUTANGA
Ruled By: BERE J

Application in terms of Order 29 of the High Court Rules, 1971.The BackgroundThe agreed facts of this matter, as given by the parties, are as follows:-On 9 November 2004, the plaintiffs entered into an Agreement of Sale with the first defendant, represented by the second defendant, in respect of the ...
More

Appealed
SC24-21 : BIG VALLEY MASTERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs SHI JINWU
Ruled By: GWAUNZA DCJ, GUVAVA JA and MAVANGIRA JA

INTRODUCTIONThis appeal arises from the judgment of the High Court in which the court a quo ordered the appellant to pay the respondent the sum of US$89,000 with interest at the prescribed rate calculated from 11 December 2012 to the date of full payment.The appellant is a gold mining company. ...
More

View Appeal
HH601-14 : SHI JINWU vs BIG VALLEY MASTERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED and PHILLIMON MUBATA
Ruled By: CHIGUMBA J

Zimbabwe adopted a policy that was dubbed “look east” as a way of combating economic sanctions that were imposed on it by the international community. The “look east” policy encourages a forging of closer business and trade ties with countries in the east as opposed to the west, the traditional ...
More

View Appeal
HMA28-20 : TRIANGLE LIMITED and HIPPO VALLEY ESTATES vs ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY and OTHERS
Ruled By: ZISENGWE J

The parties in this application are embroiled in a bitter dispute over the implications of their failure to specifically include Value Added Tax (abbreviated herein as “VAT”) matters in agreements for the milling of sugarcane.The applicants are both companies duly incorporated in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe whose names ...
More

View Appeal
HH534-18 : RIOZIM (PVT) LTD vs TRUST BANK CORPORATION LTD (IN LIQUIDATION)
Ruled By: KWENDA J

This is application made in terms of section 213 of the Companies Act [Chapter 24:03] for leave to institute proceedings against the respondent, a company in liquidation.Should leave be granted, the applicant intends to file an application in terms of Rule 449 of the High Court Rules 1971, for correction ...
More

HH169-13 : TROJAN NICKEL MINE LIMITED vs RESERVE BANK OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

It is WALLIS JA, with HARMS AJ, VAN HEERDEN JA, MALAN JA and PETSE AJA all concurring who waxed lyrical in Executive Officer of the Financial Services Board v Dynamic Wealth Ltd Ors 2012 (1) SA 543 when he said:“Ever since the bursting of the South Sea Bubble ...
More

HB57-15 : SIPIWO NKOMO vs MLWELIWENKULULEKO NCUBE
Ruled By: MUTEMA J

This is an application for rescission of a default judgment that was granted against the applicant in case number HC548/14.The facts relevant to the resolution of the dispute between the parties are briefly these:The applicant sold a BMW X5 motor vehicle registration number ACX 0734 to the respondent. The respondent ...
More

Back Main menu

Categories