Majondo v Makwanya (HC 2612 of 2013; HH 251 of 2017) [2017] ZWHHC 251 (26 April 2017)

Majondo v Makwanya (HC 2612 of 2013; HH 251 of 2017) [2017] ZWHHC 251 (26 April 2017)

The applicant failed to establish good and sufficient cause for rescission as she did not demonstrate bona fides or prospects of success on the merits. The sale of the property was in accordance with the 1995 order, and the applicant’s repeated defaults and lack of diligence preclude further indulgence. The rights of the innocent third party purchaser should not be disturbed.

Citation
[2017] ZWHHC 251
Parties
Applicant: Elizabeth Majondo; Respondent: Erenius Kufakunesu Makwanya
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
26 April 2017
Case Number
HC 2612 of 2013 ; HH 251 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Opposed Application – Rescission of Judgment / Ruling on Application for Rescission of Default Judgment
Outcome
Application for rescission dismissed
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Matrimonial Property, Default Judgment, Finality to Litigation
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Family Law Rescission of Judgment Matrimonial Property Default Judgment Finality to Litigation

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elizabeth Majondo

Applicant

Erenius Kufakunesu Makwanya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Opposed Application – Rescission of Judgment / Ruling on Application for Rescission of Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good and sufficient cause for rescission of the order made on 31 March 2015
  2. 2 Whether the applicant acted in wilful default
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has bona fide prospects of success on the merits

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish good and sufficient cause for rescission as she did not demonstrate bona fides or prospects of success on the merits. The sale of the property was in accordance with the 1995 order, and the applicant’s repeated defaults and lack of diligence preclude further indulgence. The rights of the innocent third party purchaser should not be disturbed.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission dismissed

Orders

  • The application for rescission is dismissed.
  • The applicant to pay the respondent’s costs of suit.