Chatprill Ent. (Pvt) Ltd. v Mahere (CIV “A” 209 of 2014; HH 994 of 2015) [2016] ZWHHC 994 (13 January 2016)

Chatprill Ent. (Pvt) Ltd. v Mahere (CIV “A” 209 of 2014; HH 994 of 2015) [2016] ZWHHC 994 (13 January 2016)

The sublease was invalid due to lack of authority from the owner; appellant could not claim arrear rentals after the owner's intervention as respondent was no longer in undisturbed possession under the sublease. Appellant failed to prove arrear rentals for the period before the owner's intervention, and no claim for holding over damages was properly pleaded.

Citation
[2016] ZWHHC 994
Parties
Appellant: Chatprill Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd; Respondent: Tabeth Mahere
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
13 January 2016
Case Number
CIV “A” 209 of 2014 ; HH 994 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sublease Validity, Eviction, Arrear Rentals, Authority to Sublet, Misrepresentation
Source Language
English
Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Sublease Validity Eviction Arrear Rentals Authority to Sublet Misrepresentation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chatprill Enterprises (Pvt) Ltd

Appellant

Tabeth Mahere

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether lack of authority to sublet disentitles a sub-landlord from claiming rentals from the sub-lessee
  2. 2 Whether misrepresentation by the sub-landlord disentitles it from claiming rent or eviction
  3. 3 Whether the appellant proved arrear rentals or holding over damages

Ratio Decidendi

The sublease was invalid due to lack of authority from the owner; appellant could not claim arrear rentals after the owner's intervention as respondent was no longer in undisturbed possession under the sublease. Appellant failed to prove arrear rentals for the period before the owner's intervention, and no claim for holding over damages was properly pleaded.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Each party to pay their own costs of the appeal.