Search by party name, citation, or a phrase from the judgment and move straight to the right volume.
Access noteResults only include content available on your current tier. If you do not have full case access, results from restricted case content will not appear.
Sign in to continue browsing Zimbabwe Law Reports.
Search by party name, citation, or a phrase from the judgment and move straight to the right volume.
Access noteResults only include content available on your current tier. If you do not have full case access, results from restricted case content will not appear.
Sign in to continue browsing Zimbabwe Law Reports.
Company — legal proceedings — whether company entitled to act through a director or servant
Practice and procedure — party — company — whether company or partnership is obliged to act in High Court proceedings through a legal practitioner
In a number of cases, such as D Pumpkin Construction (Pvt) Ltd v Chikaka 1997 (2) ZLR 430 (H), it had been decided that a company had to be represented in the High Court through a legal practitioner. These cases were incorrectly decided. Since 1981, in terms of the proviso to s 9(2) of the Legal Practitioners Act [Chapter 27:07], a company may act for itself in any court through a director or an officer in its sole employment. The fact that the judges had failed to incorporate this right into the Rules of the High Court did not nullify the right of company to act for itself through a director or officer and without the assistance of a legal practitioner.
Sign in or create a free account — you get 2 full-case reads included.