Order (SPOLIATION)

African Aposytolic Church (Vaapostora VeAfrica) & 5 Others v Mwazha & Anor (HH 412-20, HC 2739/20) [2020] ZWHHC 412 (09 June 2020);

AFRICAN APOSTOLIC CHURCH

(Vaapostora VeAfrica)

and

RICHARD JURU

and

NORMAN SIYAMUZHOMBWE

and

ALFRED KUSHAMISA MWAZHA

and

JAMES MWAZHA

and

ELSON TAFA

versus

NYASHA MWAZHA

and

SHINGI MALCOM CHAPFUNGA

 

 

HIGH OF ZIMBABWE

ZHOU J

HARARE, 9 June 2020

 

 

Urgent chamber application

 

 

Ms F. Chimwawadzimba, for the applicant

A. Gurira, for respondent

 

MDC- Alliance & 2 Ors v Muchekanzu & 8 Ors; Gaga & 4 Ors v The Commissioner General & 4 Ors (HH 423-20, HC 2811/20 & HC 2813/20) [2020] ZWHHC 423 (26 June 2020);

 

 

MOVEMENT FOR DEMOCRATIC CHANGE-ALLIANCE                    HC 2811/20

and

CHALTON HWENDE

and

GODFREY COTTON

versus

TENDAI MUCHEKAHANZU

and

FRIDAY MULEYA

and

PAUL GOREKORE

and

DOUGLAS TOGARASEYI MWONZORA

and

MORGEN KOMICHI

and

MOVEMENT OFR DEMOCTRATIC CHANGE-TSVANGIRAI

and

MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS & CULTUTAL HERITAGE

and

COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF POLICE N.O

and

MNISTER OF DEFENCE AND WAR VETERANS AFFAIRS N.O

 

Marondera v Garibha & Anor (HH 382-20, HC 2201/20) [2020] ZWHHC 382 (29 May 2020);

TAWIRIRANA MARONDERA

versus

IREEN GARIBHA

and

THE MINISTER OF LANDS, AGRICULTURE, WATER

CLIMATE AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT

 

 

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

ZHOU J

HARARE, 29 May 2020

 

Urgent Chamber Application

 

W T Mufuka, for the applicant

S Mpofu, for the 1st  respondent

Ms A Magunde, for the 2nd respondent

 

 

Infinity Car Sales & 2 Others v First Turn Investments t/a Shar Car Sales & Anor (HB 65-20, HCA 14/19) [2020] ZWBHC 65 (11 May 2020);

INFINITY CAR SALES

 

And

 

JAMES CHAPOTERERA

 

And

 

ARTHUR NHIDZA

 

Versus

 

FIRST TURN INVESTMENTS t/a SHAR CAR SALES

 

And

 

MESSENGER  OF COURT N.O.

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

MAKONESE & TAKUVA JJ

BULAWAYO 17 FEBRUARY 2020 11 MAY 2020

Civil Appeal

Chrome Media Investments (Pvt) Ltd v Hopside Investments (Pvt) Ltd (HH 336-20, HC 2089/20) [2020] ZWHHC 336 (31 March 2020);

CHROME MEDIA INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD

versus

HOPSCIK INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD

 

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

MUSAKWA J

HARARE, 25 & 31 March 2020

 

Urgent Chamber Application

R. Mabwe, for applicant

T. T. Makaya, for respondent

 

 

MUSAKWA J: In this matter the applicant seeks spoliatory relief in respect of number 3 Tyward Close Ballantyne Park, Harare.

Chiswa v Maxess Marketing (Pvt) Ltd & 3 Others (HH 116-20, HC 430/20) [2020] ZWHHC 116 (05 February 2020);

SHAILLON CHISWA

versus

MAXESS MARKETING (PVT) LTD

and

JOHN KAINGA

and

SUSAN MUSAKWA

and

SHERIFF OF THE HIGH COURT

 

 

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

KWENDA J

HARARE, 22 January 2020, 26 January 2020 & 5 February 2020

 

Urgent chamber application

 

O.T. Sanyika, for the applicant

T. Zhuwarara, for the 1st-3rd respondents

 

Ricnob Suppliers (Private) Limited & Another v Mandizera & Others (HB 262-18, HC 5563/18 X REF HC 1755/18) [2018] ZWBHC 262 (25 October 2018);

This was an application for an order for spoliation. The applicants claimed that they had been unlawfully dispossessed of their quiet and peaceful possession of their property by the first respondent. The first respondent contended that he was issued with a prospecting licence by the second respondent on the same land and that he entered the property on the strength of the authority from second respondent. The applicants alleged that the first respondent entered their land by cutting a fence and causing damage to their property.

The court considered whether or not there had been a spoliation and whether the applicants were entitled to relief. The court established that the first respondent unlawfully deprived the first applicant of its possession of the quarry stone site and that this was an unlawful invasion of the property as the land was private property. 

The court noted that the first respondent had not raised any of the recognised defences in an action for spoliation. The court found that the first respondent intended to take over the quarry site by forcibly removing them applicants from the quarry site without following due process as he did not possess a court order to justify his intended action.

Accordingly, the court held that the requirements for an order for spoliation had been met and ordered the respondents to return the applicant’s status quo prior to the spoliation.

 RICNOB SUPPLIERS (PRIVATE) LIMITED

and

ALFRED CHINANAYI

versus

MIKE MANDIZERA

And all those claiming title use and occupation through same at

certain piece of land being Wallingford a situate in the district of

 Insiza measuring 946.4524 hectares

and

MINISTER OF MINES AND MINERAL DEVELOPMENT

 

 

 

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

MAKONESE J

BULAWAYO 16 OCTOBER 2018 AND 25 OCTOBER 2018

 

 

Pages

Subscribe to Order (SPOLIATION)