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.
Court: "contempt " application for committal " grounds for refusal " disputes of fact " application should be granted where disputes of fact are illusory
The appellant and respondent were neighbours involved in a dispute over boundary demarcation. The dispute was resolved by a consent order in the magistrates court. The respondent failed to comply with the consent order. The appellant commenced an application for contempt of court against the respondent in the magistrates court. The magistrate dismissed the application, finding that it should have been commenced as an action and not an application as there were disputes of fact. On appeal:
Held, that there was a consent order and the boundary had also been properly demarcated by the relevant authorities. The dispute of fact was illusory and the magistrate should have granted the contempt of court order on application.
Sign in or create a free account — you get 2 full-case reads included.