Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Urgency re: Ex Parte Applications, Proceedings Without Notice and Proceedings Founded Upon Material Non-Disclosures

HH57-12 : CENTRA (PVT) LTD vs PRALENE MOYAS and DEPUTY SHERIFF, HARARE
Ruled By: BERE J

This matter makes bad reading and its background can be summarised as follows:-After the arbitrator had considered the submissions made by both the applicant and the first respondent, the Arbitrator determined the matter in favour of the first respondent and ordered the applicant to pay the respondent a total sum ...
More

HH99-12 : SHUNGU ENGINEERING (PVT) LTD vs SIMBARASHE SANGONDIMAMBO & ORS
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

This is an urgent application in which the applicant seeks a provisional order in the following terms:-“(A) TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHTThat you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:1. That the execution of the Arbitral Award in case ...
More

HH22-09 : JONAH MUFUNDISI vs GLORIA RUSERE
Ruled By: BERE J

The applicant filed an urgent chamber application wherein he sought and was granted, by me, interim relief.,. The provisional order in question was granted ex parte. Subsequently and upon my attention having been brought to the respondent's notice of opposition to the applicant's application, it dawned on me that the order I had granted ought ...
More

HH22-09 : JONAH MUFUNDISI vs GLORIA RUSERE
Ruled By: BERE J

I am fully aware of the provisions of Order 32 Rule 246(2) which allows an urgent chamber application to be determined on paper without inviting either of the litigants for a hearing. That Rule must be understood by all and sundry to clearly violate the rules of natural justice which require a party ...
More

HB02-11 : MELUSI NDLOVU vs P D S INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

In an application of this nature the applicant is obligated to make full disclosure of all material facts that affect the granting or otherwise of an order ex parte. The applicant owes the court the utmost good faith. See Grospeak Investments (Pvt) Ltd v Delta Operation (Pvt) Ltd and Another 2001 (2) ZLR 551…, where ...
More

HB44-10 : R. H GREAVES (PVT) LTD vs THE MINISTER OF LANDS, AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE and THE OFFICER IN CHARGE, ZRP, NYAMANDLOVU and THE CHIEF LANDS OFFICER, MATABELELAND NORTH
Ruled By: CHEDA J

All the respondents were served with the urgent court application as per my directive of the 4th June 2010. Only the fourth respondent has filed a notice of opposition. Because of the absence of an explanation by the first, second and third respondents, I am unable to comment on the reasons for their action.
More

HB73-10 : THABANI MOYO and ALEXANDER MUNYAKA vs HASSBRO PROPERTIES (PVT) LTD and MESSENGER OF COURT
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

At the time the applicant lodged this application they had already been evicted. They did not disclose this to the court….,. This application was brought on an ex parte basis with the obvious intention of hoodwinking the court and snatching a judgment. In an ex parte application, the utmost good faith must be observed by litigants and ...
More

HH72-13 : FIDELIS MHASHU vs WELLINGTON ASANI and ALFRED MAMVURA and THE DEPUTY SHERIFF
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

This application is punctuated by material non-disclosures. It has been stated on times without number that the utmost good faith must be displayed by litigants approaching this court in this manner and that all material facts must be disclosed to the court: Graspeak Investments v Delta Corporation (Pvt) Ltd 2001 (2) ZLR 551 (H); N ...
More

HB106-11 : QALISANI (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY and M MADONGORERE N.O.
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

It is critical to point out that when the applicant made the ex parte application seeking the relief I have referred to, it did not disclose in the application that its driver had already been convicted of smuggling and sentenced by a court of competent jurisdiction. This was in respect of the same consignment sought ...
More

HB121-11 : HAZEL NCUBE vs VICTOR MPOFU N.O. and KENNETH T. MUBETI
Ruled By: NDOU J

The salient facts of the matter are the following. The applicant and the second respondent were customarily married to each other until 1 July 2009 when their union was dissolved. The Magistrates Court awarded, inter alia, House Number 24 Nicholson Road, Romney Park, Bulawayo to the second respondent. The applicant was not satisfied by the said ...
More

HH172-14 : FARAI NDEMERA vs THE SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE and EDINA MUKURAZHIZHA and THE REGISTRAR OF HIGH COURT and THE REGISTRAR OF SUPREME COURT
Ruled By: MANGOTA J

The application which the applicant filed with the court on 27 March 2014 was termed “Ex parte urgent chamber application.” He made it in terms of Rule 242(2) of the Rules of this Court. It cited the Sheriff of Zimbabwe, one Edina Mukurazhizha, the Registrar of the High Court and the Registrar of the Supreme Court ...
More

HB198-11 : N & R AGENCIES (PVT) LTD and MARK ANDROLIAKOS vs THABANI NDLOVU and MACLEAN BHALA
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

The utmost good faith must be observed by litigants making such applications. They are enjoined to place all the material facts before the court in order to equip the court with sufficient information to arrive at a just decision. Graspeak Investments v Delta Corporation (Pvt) Ltd 2001 (2) ZLR 551 (H)…,.; Qalisa (Pvt) Ltd ...
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

Thirdly, counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicant had not disclosed material facts to the court with regards to his case….,. 2. Application is not urgent/ Material non-disclosure of facts The applicant submitted that he acted timeously as he approached the court as soon as he was served with the Notice of Eviction. It was submitted ...
More

HB14-16 : DHERERAI MANYONI vs COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF POLICE and ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER GORA
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

The court was concerned by the non-disclosure by the applicant that he had previously filed an application for review in this court under case number HCR 2165/12. A written judgment by MOYO J, HB28-14, indicates that the applicant launched an application for the review of the decision of the first respondent. The application was dismissed ...
More

HH478-15 : MUKUVISI TASHINGA HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE vs DANNY MUSUKUMA and LAST MBIZVO and CHARLIE DENGA and MSASA PARK (PRIVATE) LIMITED and ZANU P.F
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

On the issue of HC4050/15, it is unfortunate that the applicant did not find it necessary to disclose the fact that it had unsuccessfully approached this court before. The utmost good faith must be observed by litigants who approached the court on an urgent basis or ex parte. In such application, the applicant is ...
More

HH51-15 : JUSTIN MUPAMHANGA vs SAUL GOMWE and JUSTICE DHLIWAYO and BLESSING DOMBOJENA and MINISTER OF LAND AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT (N.O)
Ruled By: MAKONI J

The respondents argue that the application must fail on account of the deliberate non-disclosure of material facts by the applicant. They made reference to Graspeak Investments (Pvt) Ltd v Delta Corporation (Pvt) Ltd Anor 2001 (2) ZLR 551 and G. A. Palmer (Pvt) Ltd v Minister of National Security Ors HH60-07. What comes out in Graspeak Investments (Pvt) Ltd ...
More

HB141-16 : REV. CLEMENT NYATHI and REV. JAMES MORRIS and OTHERS vs COMMISSIONER GENERAL ZIMBABWE REPUBLIC POLICE and OFFICER IN CHARGE NJUBE POLICE STATION and TONY TSHUMA and ELLIOT NCUBE
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

It was clear that service of the urgent chamber application would likely lead to perverse conduct and that the matter needed to be dealt with urgently.
More

HB143-16 : SIFISO KHUMALO vs SIHLESENKOSI NDLOVU and ZANELE NDOWA and POLKA EXECUTORS SERVICES PL and OFFICER IN CHARGE LUVEVE POLICE STATION and ASSISTANT MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT
Ruled By: MAKONESE J

This matter was placed before me on the 25th of May 2016 as an urgent application. I directed that the application be served on all the respondents. I heard oral argument in chambers on the 1st of June 2016. At the end of the hearing I indicated that the matter was not urgent. I struck off ...
More

HB173-16 : SWEET SWEET vs JONATHAN NKANYENZI and BOY DUBE and DOUGLAS NDLOVU and MOFFAT NDLOVU and NTANDO DUBE and PATRICK TSHUMA
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

This court has repeatedly stated that the utmost good faith must be observed by all those who approach it either ex parte or on an urgent basis. They are required to disclose to the court all the facts that are relevant and would be useful in the resolution of the dispute. Urgent applications punctuated by material non-disclosures ...
More

HB233-16 : DOUGLAS NDLOVU vs THABO MASUKU
Ruled By: TAKUVA J

The applicant, in my view, has not made a full disclosure of all material facts in that he has dishonestly concealed material facts.
More

HH635-14 : ECONET WIRELESS vs POSTAL AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF ZIMBABWE (POTRAZ)
Ruled By: DUBE J

The respondent asserts that the applicant has not been candid with this court and was selective in the information it presented to the court. That if the applicant had disclosed to the court the existence of the letter dated 24 June 2014 this would have negatively affected any notions of urgency….,. Counsel for the applicant contended that ...
More

HH173-15 : BAYRICH ENTERPRISES (PVT) LTD vs XGMA ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD and THE SHERIFF
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

What I find even more disturbing is that the applicant did not see the need to disclose to the court that its application has already been dismissed by this court, per UCHENA J, and did not find it necessary to even append HC1216/15 as a cross-reference for the ease of the court. There is little doubt that ...
More

Appealed
SC10-19 : SIPHIWE DUBE vs TURFWALL MINING (PVT) LTD t/a BEENSET INVESTMENTS and OTHERS
Ruled By: GARWE JA, MAVANGIRA JA and BHUNU JA

Courts are averse to and detest dishonest litigants bent on misleading the courts. The function of the courts is to do justice. Lies are detrimental and incompatible with the due administration of justice in that they are bound to mislead the court into the wilderness of injustice. This prompted NDOU J, in Leader Trend Zimbabwe v ...
More

HMT09-18 : MUBUSO CHINGUNO vs MINISTER OF LANDS, AGRICULTURE AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and PROVINCIAL LANDS OFFICER MANICALAND and DISTRICT LANDS OFFICER CHIPINGE and COLONEL MAKUYANA
Ruled By: MWAYERA J

The applicant approached the court through the Urgent Chamber Book seeking for an interdict pendente lite.The order sought seeks to restrain the respondents, in particular the fourth respondent, from evicting and or disrupting the applicant's farming activities at Subdivision 11 of Chipinge West Annex pending the finalisation of proceedings under ...
More

HH223-18 : YEYANI MOYO vs ZB BANK LTD and SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE and TAMBANASHE ENTERPRISES PL and DOMINIC BENHURA and GOLD RECOVERY GROUP PL and PAUL DIAMOND
Ruled By: TAGU J

The applicant invoked Rule 348A of the High Court Rules, 1971 to stop the sale in execution of a dwelling house scheduled for 16th March 2018 that was purportedly attached on the 28th of February 2018 by the second respondent acting under the instructions of the first respondent.The attached property ...
More

HH258-15 : TETRAD HOLDINGS LIMITED and OTHERS vs NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY AUTHORITY and THE SHERIFF FOR ZIMBABWE N.O.
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

This was an urgent chamber application for a stay of execution.It was filed on 6 March 2015. It was brought to my chambers at 17:15 hours three days later, i.e. on 9 March 2015. There were eleven applicants. Their case was that on 6 March 2015, i.e. the date the ...
More

HH417-18 : STUTTAFORDS REMOVALS (PVT) LTD vs ZIMBABWE ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION (PVT) LTD and YCOB INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: CHIKOWERO J

I have no doubt at all that this application is not urgent.Upon receipt of the application, on 3 July 2018, I perused same and instructed that it be set down for hearing on 5 July 2018 at 9:00am.The second respondent was not cited. It was not a party to the ...
More

HH477-16 : RICHARD SEAGER vs ALESTER ZIYANGA
Ruled By: DUBE J

The applicant applies for an anti-dissipation order to restrain the respondent from removing and disposing of joint venture farm equipment owned by a partnership pending his claim.The circumstances surrounding this application are as follows:The applicant was the owner of UNA Farm, Wedza. The farm was subsequently offered to the respondent ...
More

HH08-12 : LOREEN MASHANGWA vs CHRISPEN BHADHI and TICHA DARANGWA and THE MINING COMMISSIONER GWERU
Ruled By: MAWADZE J

This is an urgent chamber application for a provisional order whose interim relief sought is stated as follows:“INTERIM RELIEF GRANTEDPending determination of the lawful owner of ANSH NORTH situated on the following map coordinates;Point A 0187976 ...
More

SC46-16 : HWANGE COLLIERY COMPANY LTD vs TENDAI MAKUTE and DEPUTY SHERIFF, HWANGE
Ruled By: CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, GOWORA JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

After perusing papers filed of record and hearing counsel in this matter we allowed the appeal with costs. We indicated therein that our reasons would follow in due course. These are they.The respondent was formerly employed by the appellant. Sometime in September 2012, the appellant obtained approval from the Ministry ...
More

Back Main menu

Categories