Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Practicing Certificates and Right of Audience re: Assumption, Renunciation of Agency & Correspondent Legal Practitioners

HB65-09 : ELPHAS MAPHISA vs NHLANHLA MAPHISA
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Both parties were legally represented during the pleadings, but, by the time the matter came for trial their respective legal representatives had filed notices of renounciation of agency making the parties self-actors when the matter came for trial.
More

HH220-10 : BACHI FARM (PVT) LTD and COBBLESTONE INVESTMENTS and TRIBACK (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs OLIVER DZVENE and HOWARD MATARE and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

At the hearing of this urgent matter counsel for the first to seventh respondents raised two points in limine. The first point was that none of the applicants were present, preferring to send only their legal practitioner.
More

HB03-09 : HLANGOTHI MSIMANGA and SILINDA SONGO and MANDLENKOSI SONGO vs LOMATHEMBA SONGO N.O. and ASSISTANT MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT and CITY OF BULAWAYO
Ruled By: NDOU J

The only issue left for determination is one of assumption of agency. The application under HC933/05 was filed by Messrs Marondedze, Nyathi and Partners. At the time of the hearing of this application, they had not renounced agency. Messrs Marondedze and Partners only assumed agency in relation to case HC1884/05 and then purported to have mandate ...
More

HH40-15 : DAVID JOHN CARROLL vs STEELBASE ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

Much energy was spent on technical issues. Mr Macharaga, of the law firm Mugiya Macharaga Law Chambers, who appeared for Steelbase, initially wanted a postponement. He had just assumed agency but had not done so formally. He said he had had no time to study the matter. All along, Steelbase had ...
More

HH40-15 : DAVID JOHN CARROLL vs STEELBASE ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

Rule 6 provides for the renunciation of agency by a legal practitioner. The Notice of Renunciation must be served on the client, the court and all the other parties to the proceedings.
More

HH57-15 : MACRO PLUMBERS (PVT) LTD vs SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE N.O. and OWEN CHIGOYA
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

The first point taken in limine on behalf of the applicant is that Messrs Thodhlanga Associates, who represent the second respondent have no authority to do so because in HC10643/13 the second respondent was represented by Messrs Hore Partners while Thodhlanga Associates were their correspondents. So what? It is the Constitutional right of every ...
More

HH747-15 : BARRY JAMES WARWICK vs MERCY JONGA
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

According to the record, Antonio Dzvetero legal practitioners have not renounced agency; meaning that they still represent the respondent, but they did not bother to turn up for the hearing.
More

SC61-18 : ILASHA MINING (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs YATAKALA TRADING (PRIVATE) LIMITED t/a VIKING HARDWARE DISTRIBUTORS
Ruled By: BHUNU JA

The applicant was originally represented by Messrs Z Ncube Legal Practitioners in the main appeal but is now represented by Messrs Job Sibanda and Associates. The changeover of legal practitioners was done with scant regard to the Rules of Court. There was neither a Notice of Renunciation of Agency by the erstwhile legal practitioners nor a Notice of ...
More

HH366-16 : JOHANNES TOMANA vs JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION and THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS
Ruled By: MAKONI J

At the resumption of the hearing Mr Mpofu withdrew from the matter and Mr Hashiti took over.
More

HH208-15 : GOOD LIVING REAL ESTATE PL vs ADAM AND COMPANY PL and SGI PROPERTIES PL and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMITH
Ruled By: MUREMBA J

It is puzzling that the applicant engaged two different law firms to represent it at the same time. The two law firms ended up writing letters with different requests to the third respondent on the same day. One was asking the arbitrator to stay proceedings pending the determination of the ...
More

HHB345-16 : NQOBILE KHUMALO vs THE PRESIDING MAGISTRATE N.O. (MR MZINGAYE MOYO) and THE PROSECUTOR GENERAL N.O.
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

In the practice of law the world over, it is an accepted principle that legal practitioners are officers of the court. As such, they assist the court in dispensing justice and owe the court a duty to not only bring to its attention legal pronouncements on the law that are ...
More

HH345-13 : CHAMUNORWA MUTYAMBIZI vs JOSE MASELINO GONCALVES and ANOR and THE SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE N.O.
Ruled By: DUBE J

This is an application for an order for contempt of court against the first respondent. The terms of the order sought are as follows;“TERMS OF THE ORDER SOUGHTIT IS DECLARED THAT:1. The 1st respondent is guilty of contempt of court of the order of this honourable court granted under case ...
More

HB31-15 : TAMIRA OVERSEAS S.A. vs AQUIRIUM TRADING (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: TAKUVA J

The applicant applied for an order placing the respondent under provisional liquidation in terms of sections 207, 206(f)(g) as read with section 205(c) of the Companies Act [Chapter 24:03].This Court, per MAKONESE J, on 18 September 2014, issued the following provisional order:“1. The respondent, Aquirium Trading (Pvt) Ltd is provisionally ...
More

HB33-15 : MASIWA HWARA vs EUBERTINNAH MUDIMU (as Executrix of Estate Late Felix Mudimu) and ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT N.O.
Ruled By: MUTEMA J

The applicant herein seeks an order that the second respondent re-open the estate of the late Felix Mudimu so that she may lodge her claim for the transfer of a property known as House Number 5747 Nketa 9, Bulawayo.The application is opposed by the first respondent who is the widow ...
More

CC02-22 : MUTUMWA MAWERE and OTHERS vs TICHAONA MUPASIRI and OTHERS
Ruled By: MAKARAU JCC

I..., did not make a definitive ruling on the issue raised by the applicants that the second respondent (the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe) was not properly before me, he being represented by a private law firm as opposed to being represented exclusively by the office of the Attorney-General.I ...
More

HH494-13 : PATRICIA MAPINI vs OMNI AFRICA (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: TSANGA J

This is an opposed application for rescission of judgment which has its genesis in the dismissal of the applicant, Patricia Mapini, from employment by the respondent, Omni Africa.The applicant was engaged as a Sage Pastel Sales Executive by the respondent.The working relationship soured when the respondent terminated the applicant's contract ...
More

Back Main menu

Categories

Back to top