Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Urgency re: Approach, the Principle of Equality of Treatment & Discretion of the Court to Hear Oral Arguments on Urgency

HH33-12 : BRIAN JUSTICE ENTERPRISES PL vs H.E.R. (PVT) LTD and NITSA OLYMPIOS and PARIS OLYMPIOS and CHRISTOS VENTURAS and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: HUNGWE J

This matter was placed before me through the Chamber Book on 25 January 2012.After I perused the papers, I directed that the matter be set down for hearing the next day.On this day, the parties addressed me on the issue of urgency. I found the matter to be urgent and ...
More

HH19-07 : PONDORO (PVT) LTD and DOUGLAS TAYLOR-FREME vs MENDE NEMAKONDE and THE MAGISTRATE, CHINHOYI
Ruled By: HUNGWE J

This matter was placed before me under a certificate of urgency on 17 January 2008. I gave directions that it be heard the following day as I deemed it appropriate that the Rules of Court be dispensed with in the interests of achieving justice in this particular matter.
More

HH40-09 : DODHILL (PVT) LTD and SIMON KEEVIL vs THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and NYASHA CHIKAFU
Ruled By: BERE J

There is no standard formula which determines the issue of urgency. Every case must be looked at within its own context.
More

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

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

Appealed
HH108-12 : OLIVER CHIDAWU and BROADWAY INVESTMENTS and DANOCT INVESTMENTS and DANNOV INVESTMENTS vs JAYESH SHAH and TN ASSET MANAGEMENT and ISB SECURITIES and ZIMBABWE STOCK EXCHANGE and CORPSERVE
Ruled By: UCHENA J

An urgent chamber application can only be properly before the court or be heard on an urgent basis, if the applicant is legally represented, if a legal practitioner files a certificate certifying its urgency. If the certificate filed is not the product of the legal practitioner who purports to have issued its' mind and is ...
More

HH192-12 : NATIONAL AIRWAYS WORKERS' UNION AND AIR TRANSPORT UNION vs AIR ZIMBABWE HOLDINGS (PVT) LTD AND NATIONAL HANDLING SERVICES (PVT) LTD AND THREE OTHERS
Ruled By: MUTEMA J

The rationale underlying the legal concept of urgency as contemplated by the Rules of this Court: A matter is urgent when the need to act arises it cannot wait and the application is timeously made. When it comes to urgency, the issue is not whether a respondent's actions are deemed lawful or it is ...
More

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

The question of what constitutes urgency, in my view, is now no longer an issue for debate in our law. See Kuvarega v Registrar General Anor 1998 (1) ZLR 188.In the case of Mathias Madzivanzira 2 Ors v Dexprint Investments (Pvt) Ltd Anor HH145-05…, NDOU J ...
More

HH111-08 : RAILWAY ARTISANS UNION and RAILWAY ASSOCIATION OF YARD OPERATING STAFF and ANOR vs RAILMED and NATIONAL RAILWAYS OF ZIMBABWE and RAILWAYS EMPLOYMENT COUNCIL
Ruled By: GOWORA J

This matter was initially placed before me under a certificate of urgency. As the final and interim relief sought on the provisional order were the same, I wrote an endorsement on the face of the application querying the manner in which the relief had been framed.The letter of explanation was ...
More

HH36-08 : MASIMBA KUCHERA and MICHAEL MUZA and TAFADZWA RUGOHO vs MINSTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS
Ruled By: GUVAVA J

It is trite that no litigant is entitled, as of right, to have his or her matter heard urgently: see Dilwin Investments (Pvt) Ltd t/a Farmscaff v Jopa Enigineering Co (Pvt) Ltd HH116-98.The granting of urgent relief by a court is a matter of the courts discretion and is granted ...
More

HH04-10 : MYDALE INTERNATIONAL MARKETING (PVT) LTD vs DR ROB KELLY and HAMMER AND TONGUES (PVT) LTD
Ruled By: GOWORA J

The first respondent herein had, under Case No. HC1049/09, instituted proceedings against the applicant and second respondent herein. On 30 March 2009, OMERJEE J issued an order as follows:“IT IS ORDERED THAT:1. Mydale International Marketing (Pvt) Ltd is entitled to receive from the second respondent and have in its custody ...
More

HH57-10 : AFRICAN CONSOLIDATED RESOURCES PLC and OTHERS vs MINISTER OF MINES AND MINING DEVELOPMENT and SECRETARY FOR MINES AND MINING DEVELOPMENT and CHIEF MINING COMMISSIONER
Ruled By: UCHENA J

In the case of Kuvarega v Registrar General Anor 1998 (1) ZLR 188…, CHATIKOBO J said:“What constitutes urgency is not only the imminent arrival of the day of reckoning; a matter is urgent, if, at the time the need to act arises, the matter cannot wait. Urgency, which ...
More

HH70-10 : CHURCH OF THE PROVINCE OF CENTRAL AFRICA vs ELSON M JAKAZI and ALEX & WEBB REALITY and THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: UCHENA J

Counsel for the applicant submitted that the evidence of the inquiry is not inadmissible hearsay as first hand hearsay is admissible in terms of section 27 of the Criminal Evidence Act [Chapter 8:01]. He further submitted that hearsay evidence is admissible in urgent interlocutory applications.Counsel for the first and second ...
More

HH92-10 : MUDZIMUUNOERA APOSTOLIC CHURCH BOARD OF TRUSTEES vs MUDZIMUUNOERA APOSTOLIC CHURCH –GURUVE DIVISION and THE DEPUTY SHERIFF-MT DARWIN
Ruled By: MAKARAU JP

It is trite that in urgent chamber applications two complimentary principles are at play. Due to the nature of the proceedings, the judge presiding over an urgent chamber application may not issue a final order save with the consent of all parties before him or her. This is because a plaintiff approaching the court ...
More

SC03-14 : PHINEAS MARIYAPERA vs EDDIES PFUGARI (PRIVATE) LIMITED and CHEGUTU MUNICIPALITY
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and PATEL JA

This is an appeal against a judgment of the High Court which dismissed, with costs on the scale of legal practitioner and client, an urgent application brought by the appellant. The basis of the dismissal was that the matter was not urgent….,. Counsel for the appellant, in his submissions before us, raised two points. Firstly, that having found ...
More

HH190-10 : NGONI MUDEKUNYE and GLADYS CHAMUTSA and MASIMBA MUDEKUNYE and TAMBURIKA MUDEKUNYE vs AARON EVANS MUDEKUNYE and BERTHA MUDEKUNYE and DEPUTY SHERIFF CHIPINGE N.O.
Ruled By: BERE J

The urgency of the matter I have already made a specific determination that there was nothing improper about the way in which the certificate of urgency was prepared in this case. However, I am concerned with the conduct of the two legal practitioners who represented the applicants on two different occasions before two different judges ...
More

HH51-11 : MARYLOU PALALPAC MORTEN (NEE DACANAY) vs MARLENE DENISE KEMI MORTEN and TONY YOUNG and DANDARO HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION
Ruled By: MAWADZE J

This is an urgent chamber application for a provisional order whose interim relief sought is couched as follows:“Interim Relief GrantedThat pending the return date respondents be and are hereby ordered to restore vacant possession and occupation of Flat 112 Dandaro Village, Borrowdale, Harare to the applicant with immediate effect.”The terms of the final order are construed ...
More

HH32-13 : WASHMATE MOTORS CENTRE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs CITY OF HARARE
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

This court has repeatedly stated that the utmost good faith must be shown by litigants making applications of this nature in placing all material facts before the court so that the court can make an informed decision: N R Agencies (Pvt) Ltd Anor v Ndlovu Anor HH198-11; Shungu Engineering ...
More

HH363-13 : TAKANAYI MUREYI vs FORTUNE CHARUMBIRA
Ruled By: MTSHIYA J

Due to the nature of the allegations in this application, I did not find it difficult to accept the urgency of the matter. The respondent's legal practitioners did not raise issue with urgency. I therefore proceeded to look at the merits of the matter.
More

HB63-13 : CHIEF GAMPU SITHOLE and GAMPU TOURS (PVT) LTD vs KENNEDY C. NDLOVU and THE DEPUTY SHERIFF OF BULAWAYO N.O.
Ruled By: MUTEMA J

For the applicants, it was submitted that the application remained urgent as stated in the founding affidavit. It was argued that whilst it was conceded that the need to act arose on 13 February 2013, when the applicants became aware of the grant of leave to execute pending appeal, the first applicant was not available ...
More

SC17-14 : ANTHONY HICKEY vs DMC HOLDINGS PL and CHRISTMAS GIFT PL and ROGERIO B.A. DE SA and NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY AUTHORITY
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and PATEL JA

We pause to mention…, that having found the matter not to be urgent, the court a quo should simply have issued an order that the matter be removed from the roll….,.
More

Appealed
SC65-14 : AIR ZIMBABWE (PRIVATE) LIMITED and AIR ZIMBABWE HOLDINGS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs STEPHEN NHUTA and DEPUTY SHERIFF HARARE and SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and PATEL JA

The first ground of appeal makes no sense because the court a quo did not decline to hear the matter. Indeed, having found that the matter was not urgent it nevertheless proceeded to hear and determine it on an urgent basis. In so doing, the court a quo contradicted itself. What it should have ...
More

SC71-14 : EDWARD TAWANDA MADZA and OTHERS vs REFORMED CHURCH IN ZIMBABWE DAISYFIELD TRUST and REFORMED CHURCH OF ZIMBABWE and NAISON TIRIVAVI and DUTCH REFORMED CHURCH
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GARWE JA and HLATSHWAYO JA

Having concluded the matter was not urgent, the proper course would have been to remove the matter from the roll of urgent matters to allow the appellants, if so minded, to place the matter before the High court on the ordinary roll for determination. The order of dismissal was improper in the circumstances.The ...
More

View Appeal
SC43-13 : ECONET WIRELESS (PVT) LTD vs TRUSTCO MOBILE (PROPRIETARY) LTD and TRUSTCO GROUP INTERNATIONAL (PROPRIETARY) LTD
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, ZIYAMBI JA and GARWE JA

THE QUESTION OF URGENCY It is common cause, on the papers, that the urgent application filed by the respondents was only filed on 22 June 2011 - almost three weeks after the events giving rise to the dispute had occurred. It is the appellant's contention that the delay in filing the application was inordinate and that ...
More

SC03-15 : PORTLAND HOLDINGS LIMITED vs TUPELOSTEP INVESTMENTS (PROPRIETARY) LIMITED and TOBACCO WAREHOUSE & EXPORT t/a BAK LOGISTICS
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GOWORA JA and OMERJEE AJA

However, over and above these criticisms, the High Court, having decided to determine the matter on the issue of urgency, dismissed the application on the basis that it was not urgent. This was not the proper course to follow. Instead, it should have removed the matter from the roll on the basis that it lacked ...
More

SC03-17 : HAROLD CROWN and PORTRIVER INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs ENERGY RESOURCES AFRICA CONSORTIUM (PRIVATE) LIMITED and ENERGY RESOURCES AFRICA (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Ruled By: ZIYAMBI JA, GWAUNZA JA and PATEL JA

GROUND 1: Urgency The question of urgency is generally a matter for the discretion of the court. It is only in certain limited circumstances that a superior court will be persuaded to interfere with a decision arrived at pursuant to a discretion exercised by a lower court. Accordingly, while this court may entertain different ...
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

Counsel for the respondents argued, firstly, that the application was not filed in accordance with Rule 241 of the High Court Rules. He submitted that on that basis, alone, the application should be dismissed as there is no application for condonation for the failure to comply with the Rules….,. 1. Non-compliance with Rule 241(1) ...
More

HMA07-17 : CHARLES MASANGO and GLORIA MASAWI vs MINISTER OF PRIMARY & SECONDARY EDUCATION N.O. and PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION and DISTRICT SCHOOLS INSPECTOR N.O.and HEADMASTER, CHINGOMA HIGH SCHOOL
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

GILLESPIE J, in General Transport Engineering [Pvt] Ltd Ors v Zimbabwe Banking Corporation Ltd 1998 [2] ZLR 301 [H] and Dilwin Investments [Pvt] Ltd v Jopa Enterprises Co Ltd HH116-98 said: “A party who brings proceedings urgently gains considerable advantage over persons whose disputes are being dealt with in the normal ...
More

HH13-15 : MICHAEL BASIKITI vs CHIVERO STANELY MDOKWANI and MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and DEPUTY SHERIFF, MARONDERA
Ruled By: NDEWERE J

The case of New Vision Promotions v Ganya and Ors HB54-07…, is relevant to this case. In that case, the court said:- “An urgent chamber application accompanied by a certificate of urgency should be accompanied by Form 29B as stipulated by Rule 241.” The case of Mandlenkosi Nhliziyo v Greys Service and Ors HH194-10 is ...
More

HMA12-17 : BRIAN ANDREW CAWOOD vs ELASTO MADZINGIRA and THE MESSENGER OF COURT – MWENEZI N.O.
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

It has been stated time and again that the object of an urgent chamber application is to get interim protection. Because of the urgency that may be manifest on the papers, the application is allowed to jump the queue of cases awaiting determination at the courts. But the issues are not interrogated to any ...
More

HMA19-17 : VENGAI RUSHWAYA vs NELSON BVUNGO and THE SHERIFF FOR ZIMBABWE N.O.
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

Where urgency is central, dates are crucial.
More

HMA19-17 : VENGAI RUSHWAYA vs NELSON BVUNGO and THE SHERIFF FOR ZIMBABWE N.O.
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

Where a matter has been adjudged to be not urgent, the general practice is simply to remove it from the roll for urgent matters: See African Consolidated Resources Plc Ors v Minister of Mines and Mining Development Ors 2010 (1) ZLR 208 (H); Mariyapera v Eddies Pfugari (Private) Limited ...
More

HB101-16 : TAKESURE MUVENGWA vs CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT ZULU and SUPERINTENDENT CHIRIGA
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

Urgent applications are those where, if the court fails to act, the applicants may be entitled to say to the court that it should not bother to act at a later stage because their position would have become irreversible and to their prejudice. See Document Support Centre (Pvt) Ltd v Mapuvire 2006 (1) ZLR 232 (H) ...
More

HH446-15 : TELECEL ZIMBABWE vs POSTAL AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS REGULATORY AUTHORITY and MINISTER OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY N.O. and CHIEF SECRETARY, OFFICE OF PRESIDENT and EMPOWERMENT CORPORATION
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

I agree with counsel for the applicant that raising the issue of urgency by respondents finding themselves faced with an urgent application is now a matter of routine. Invariably, when one opens a notice of opposition these days, he is confronted by a point in limine challenging the urgency of the application which should not be made at all. We ...
More

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

The urgent chamber application was placed before Honourable CHATUKUTA J who initially refused it on the basis that it lacked urgency. The applicant persisted, requesting audience with the Honourable Judge as it was the firm view that the judge would be persuaded by the weight of its argument on that point if given an opportunity ...
More

HB109-16 : EDSON MUDZINGWA vs SUSAN CHITANDO MAPANZURE and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS (HARARE) N.O.
Ruled By: MATHONSI J

What litigants should appreciate is that where an application has been brought on a certificate of urgency, Rule 244 requires the Judge before whom such an application is placed to drop everything and consider the papers forthwith. Of course, the Judge has a disrection to set the matter down and direct that any interested person be ...
More

HH225-15 : RITA MARQUE MBATHA vs CONFEDERATION OF ZIMBABWE INDUSTRIES
Ruled By: CHATUKUTA J

On 27 February 2015, I made a preliminary assessment of whether or not the application was urgent. I opined and endorsed that the application was not urgent. I further endorsed that the relief that the applicant was seeking was incompetent in that the interim relief sought was the same as the final order. The applicant, ...
More

HH115-15 : MEGALINK INVESTMENTS vs OWEN MURIMBI and THERESA MUSINA and AFRICAN CENTURY LIMITED and SHERIFF, HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE
Ruled By: TSANGA J

Both parties were heard on urgency and the merits.
More

HH173-11 : PROGRESSIVE TEACHERS UNION OF ZIMBABWE and OTHERS vs ZIMBABWE CONGRESS OF TRADE UNIONS and OTHERS
Ruled By: MAVANGIRA J

This urgent chamber application was placed before me on 15 August 2011. After perusing the papers, I endorsed thereon, on the same date: “The papers do not establish how or when the urgency arose. The matter is not urgent.” On 16 August 2011, a letter with an 'urgent' sticker was addressed to the Registrar requesting that the applicant ...
More

HH128-15 : KUKURA KURERWA BUS COMPANY (PVT) LTD vs JAPHET LUNGA and 55 OTHERS and ADDITIONAL SHERIFF
Ruled By: MANGOTA J

A. BACKGROUND On 31 October, 2014 the applicant filed an urgent chamber application with the court. The application's case number was HC9633/14. The Registrar placed the application before me on the morning of 5 November, 2014. On my perusal of the application, I remained of the view that the application was not urgent. I accordingly communicated my position to ...
More

HH141-15 : GOODWELL CHIPURIRO vs CITY OF HARARE
Ruled By: UCHENA J

The urgent chamber application procedure is intended to serve litigants whose cases deserve to jump the queue of cases awaiting determination by judges. The jumping of the queue must be justified. Precedents on urgency clearly state that only cases which cannot wait should be allowed to jump the queue. A case cannot wait if the day of ...
More

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

Rule 244 of the High Court Rules 1971 states; “Where a chamber application is accompanied by a certificate from a legal practitioner in terms of paragraph (b) of subrule (2) of Rule 242, to the effect that the matter is urgent, giving reasons for its urgency, the Registrar shall immediately submit it to a judge who shall consider ...
More

CC07-14 : MAYOR LOGISTICS (PVT) LTD vs ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ

The principle of equality of treatment requires that a litigant whose case is pending hearing in a court must be subjected to the same procedure as is applied to others for the determination of the question whether his or her case is ready to be set down for hearing by the court….,. A party favoured with an ...
More

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

The requirements of urgency have been articulated in numerous decisions and the law is considered settled. The law is basically that in any matter where an applicant brings an application on an urgent basis he should show that the matter cannot wait to be determined in the sense that if not dealt with immediately irreparable harm will ...
More

HH151-15 : CMED (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs KENNETH MAPHOSA and SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE N.O. and ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY
Ruled By: CHIGUMBA J

On 3 December 2014, a letter addressed to my assistant was served in chambers by counsel for the applicants. In the letter, the legal practitioners proceeded to advise my assistant that they were not happy with the endorsement of lack of urgency because they had not been heard in oral argument….,. In their letter, they ...
More

HH151-15 : CMED (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs KENNETH MAPHOSA and SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE N.O. and ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY
Ruled By: CHIGUMBA J

The test for urgency is settled. It is so settled as to be cast in stone. One wonders why legal practitioners continue to grapple with the requirements of urgency, and why they continue to ill-advise their clients, resulting in a waste of the court's time and a corresponding waste of resources. It has been held that: “Applications are frequently ...
More

HH225-11 : KERENZA MUSHATI vs LUISE KUDAKWASHE MUSHATI and SMART MTETWA and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: MAWADZE J

The applicant filed this urgent chamber application on Friday 23 September 2011. I was only allocated this matter on Monday 26 September 2011. I attended to the matter the same day, and, upon considering the application, I declined to set down the matter for hearing on account that the matter is not urgent. An endorsement ...
More

HH225-11 : KERENZA MUSHATI vs LUISE KUDAKWASHE MUSHATI and SMART MTETWA and REGISTRAR OF DEEDS
Ruled By: MAWADZE J

The question of what constitutes urgency, in my view, is now settled in our law. See Kuvarega v Registrar General Anor 1998 (1) ZLR 188…,.. In the case of Gifford v Muzire Ors 2007 (2) ZLR 13 (H)…, KUDYA J had this to say in dealing with the question of urgency: “All that the applicant has ...
More

HMA12-18 : CONSTABLE CHIHWAI vs BOARD PRESIDENT N.O., CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT NYATHI M and COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF POLICE
Ruled By: MAFUSIRE J

The first time the application was placed before me, I declined to set it down. My view was that the matter was not so urgent as to be given preference over a glut of other cases awaiting determination by this court. Counsel for the applicant did not agree. He sought audience to convince me that the matter ...
More

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

After rendering judgment in HH281-16, whereby the applicant and the first respondent sought referral of certain questions to the Constitutional Court, I set the urgent chamber application filed by the applicant for hearing. To give a brief background, the urgent chamber application was filed on 25 February 2016. The first respondent filed its Notice of Opposition on 29 ...
More

Back Main menu

Categories