Archive logo
© Zimbabwe Law Reports — 2026.
Home

Navigation

Browse

Search

Find a case in seconds

Close search modal

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.

Try a starting point
Member access

Welcome back

Sign in to continue browsing Zimbabwe Law Reports.

Don't have an account?

Menu

Close panel
Archive logo
← Home

2008 — Volume 2

Cases

Select a case to view its details and legal content.

M B ZIKO (PVT) LTD & ANOR V CESTARON INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 1 (S)
CHIVORE V MUDAVANHU & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 16 (H)
MAZIBUKO NO & ANOR V NDEBELE & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 26 (H)
SIKANYIKA V GARADI
2008 (2) ZLR 30 (H)
SHIRIYEKUTANGA BUS SERVICES (PVT) LTD V TOTAL ZIMBABWE
2008 (2) ZLR 37 (H)
ESTATE WAKAPILA V MATONGO & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 43 (H)
KAUNGWA V NGUNI
2008 (2) ZLR 50 (E)
S V CHERA & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 58 (H)
SHUMBA & ANOR V ZEC & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 65 (S)
S V MUKOME
2008 (2) ZLR 83 (H)
GARATI V MUDZINGWA (MAU MAU) & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 88 (S)
KADZIMA V CHIMBETE
2008 (2) ZLR 96 (E)
MUTSINYA V DANDE HOLDINGS (PVT) LTD & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 102 (H)
GAMBIZA V TAZIVA
2008 (2) ZLR 107 (H)
MPOFU V COMMISSIONER OF POLICE & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 117 (S)
HEM GRANITE INDUSTRIES (PVT) LTD V KEELEY GRANITE (PVT) LTD
2008 (2) ZLR 123 (S)
FANTAISIE FARM (PVT) LTD & ORS V MANYERUKE & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 132 (S)
MAWERE V MINISTER OF JUSTICE
2008 (2) ZLR 140 (S)
DOBROCK HOLDINGS (PVT) LTD V TURNER & SONS (PVT) LTD & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 153 (S)
S V GAVIYAYA
2008 (2) ZLR 159 (H)
TAYLOR V TAYLOR
2008 (2) ZLR 165 (S)
KUNG V KUNG
2008 (2) ZLR 170 (S)
NATIONAL MERCHANT BANK (PVT) LTD V THE COLD CHAIN (PVT) LTD
2008 (2) ZLR 177 (H)
MUDIMA V COMMISSIONER GENERAL, ZIMBABWE REVENUE AUTHORITY
2008 (2) ZLR 189 (H)
MEGA PAK ZIMBABWE (PVT) LTD V GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES CENTRAL AFRICA (PVT) LTD
2008 (2) ZLR 195 (H)
ZIMNAT LIFE ASSURANCE LTD V DIKUNYE
2008 (2) ZLR 200 (S)
KHUMALO V MANDEYA & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 203 (S)
RIX UPHOLSTERY (PVT) LTD V BIDDULPHS (PVT) LTD
2008 (2) ZLR 210 (H)
NYANDORO & ANOR V NYANDORO & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 219 (H)
SAMUDZIMU V NGWENYA
2008 (2) ZLR 228 (H)
AFRICA FIRST RENAISSANCE CORPORATION LTD V ACM INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 237 (H)
ANCHOR RANCHING (PVT) LTD V BENEFICIAL ENTERPRISES (PVT) LTD & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 246 (H)
TIMBE V REGISTRAR-GENERAL
2008 (2) ZLR 250 (S)
METRO INTERNATIONAL (PVT) LTD V OLD MUTUAL PROPERTY INVESTMENT CORP (PVT) LTD
2008 (2) ZLR 257 (S)
MUFUNDISI V RUSERE
2008 (2) ZLR 264 (H)
CHIRAMBA V MINISTER HOME AFFAIRS & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 269 (H)
S V GWANDE & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 281 (H)
COMMUNICATION & ALLIED INDUSTRIES PENSIONERS' ASSOCIATION V COMMUNICATION & ALLIED INDUSTRIES PENSION FUND
2008 (2) ZLR 288 (S)
HILTUNEN V HILTUNEN
2008 (2) ZLR 296 (H)
P ROSATI & SONS (PVT) LTD V P & C PANEL BEATERS & SPRAY PAINTERS (PVT) LTD
2008 (2) ZLR 304 (H)
MUJURU NO & ORS V THE MASTER & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 308 (H)
MALOYA V NYAMUPFUKUDZA NO & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 314 (H)
MAKAMURE V DEVEN ENGINEERING (PVT) LTD
2008 (2) ZLR 319 (H)
MURADA V MURADA
2008 (2) ZLR 326 (H)
MOYO V NCUBE & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 333 (H)
S V MOYO & ORS
2008 (2) ZLR 338 (H)
MIKE CAMPBELL (PVT) LTD & ORS V REPUBLIC OF ZIMBABWE
2008 (2) ZLR 343 (SADC T)
SHUMBA V CHAIRMAN, ZIMBABWE ELECTORAL COMMISSION & ANOR
2008 (2) ZLR 370 (H)
© Zimbabwe Law Reports — 2026.
Home

Navigation

Browse

Search

Find a case in seconds

Close search modal

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.

Try a starting point
Member access

Welcome back

Sign in to continue browsing Zimbabwe Law Reports.

Don't have an account?

Menu

Close panel

CHIVORE v MUDAVANHU & ANOR 2008 (2) ZLR 16 (H)

Case details
Citation
2008 (2) ZLR 16 (H)
Case No
Judgment No. HH-61-08
Court
Electoral Court of Zimbabwe
Judge
Chitakunye J
Heard
17 July 2008
Judgment
17 July 2008
Counsel
C Mukome, for the petitioner. D C Kufaruwenga, for the first respondent. No appearance for the second respondent.
Case Type
Election petition
Annotations
No case annotations to date

Flynote

Elections — election petition — service of notice of petition on respondent — where such notice must be served — must be at respondent's "usual or last known" dwelling or place of business — meaning

Headnote

Section 169 of the Electoral Act [Chapter 2:13] provides that notice of the presentation of an election petition shall "be served by the petitioner on the respondent either personally or by leaving the same at his or her usual or last known dwelling or place of business." This means that service must be either personally or by leaving the papers at the respondent's usual or last known dwelling or place of business. It is not enough to serve the notice at the respondent's party's offices. The legislature intended that the respondent should get to know about the petition personally as soon as possible. The addresses for service are such that the respondent frequents them as his usual dwelling or place of business. The term "usual" in this instance means "ordinarily used", "frequently used" or "that is in ordinary use". The dwelling place or place of business thus has to be where the respondent is ordinarily found or frequents or is expected to be available on a day to a day basis; it is not just any dwelling place or place of business for the respondent. It is for the petitioner to show that the respondent frequents or is ordinarily found at the place at which service was effected. To merely say that a party headquarters is the respondent's place of business is not good enough. Even if, for instance, the respondent was employed by the party, the party's headquarters would still not suffice if that is not where the respondent is based. Election petitions are for the personal attention of the particular respondent. It is the respondent's, not the party's, election which is being challenged. It is the respondent, not his party, on whom the responsibility to act promptly is imposed and on whom the dire consequences of failure to act promptly fall.

Sign in required

Continue beyond the preview

Sign in or create a free account — you get 2 full-case reads included.