Ndlovu v Masuku (HB 233 of 2016; HC 1572 of 2016; XREF HC 1457 of 2016; XREF HC 920 of 2015) [2016] ZWBHC 233 (8 September 2016)

Ndlovu v Masuku (HB 233 of 2016; HC 1572 of 2016; XREF HC 1457 of 2016; XREF HC 920 of 2015) [2016] ZWBHC 233 (8 September 2016)

The applicant failed to establish urgency as required by law, having not specified when the alleged dispossession occurred in the founding affidavit or certificate of urgency, and failed to make full disclosure of material facts.

Citation
[2016] ZWBHC 233
Parties
Applicant: Douglas Ndlovu; Respondent: Thabo Masuku
Court
Bulawayo High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
8 September 2016
Case Number
HB 233 of 2016 ; HC 1572 of 2016 ; XREF HC 1457 of 2016 ; XREF HC 920 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Urgent Chamber Application / Ruling on Urgency
Outcome
Application dismissed for lack of urgency
Legal Topics
Spoliation, Urgency in Applications
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Spoliation Urgency in Applications

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 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Douglas Ndlovu

Applicant

Thabo Masuku

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Chamber Application / Ruling on Urgency

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application is urgent
  2. 2 Whether the applicant has satisfied the requirements for a spoliation order

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish urgency as required by law, having not specified when the alleged dispossession occurred in the founding affidavit or certificate of urgency, and failed to make full disclosure of material facts.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for lack of urgency

Orders

  • The application is not urgent.
  • The applicant shall pay costs of this application.