Chikore v Maworera (135 of 2024) [2024] ZWHHC 135 (3 April 2024)

Chikore v Maworera (135 of 2024) [2024] ZWHHC 135 (3 April 2024)

The court found that the plaintiff failed to make adequate averments to establish jurisdiction in the summons and declaration, and that there was no attachment of the defendant's person or property. Both parties were resident outside Zimbabwe, and the court could not give effect to any judgment without such attachment. The belated attempt to cure jurisdictional defects in replication was insufficient. Therefore, the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the action.

Citation
[2024] ZWHHC 135
Parties
Plaintiff: Jill Chawapiwa Chikore; Defendant: Hellen Maworera
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
3 April 2024
Case Number
135 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Special Plea (jurisdiction) Ruling
Outcome
claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Adultery Damages, Jurisdiction, Security for Costs, Delict
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Family Law Adultery Damages Jurisdiction Security for Costs Delict

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jill Chawapiwa Chikore

Plaintiff

Hellen Maworera

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Special Plea (jurisdiction) Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court of Zimbabwe has jurisdiction over parties who are both resident outside Zimbabwe in a claim for adultery damages
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff properly pleaded jurisdiction in the summons and declaration
  3. 3 Whether the absence of security for costs or attachment of property affects jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff failed to make adequate averments to establish jurisdiction in the summons and declaration, and that there was no attachment of the defendant's person or property. Both parties were resident outside Zimbabwe, and the court could not give effect to any judgment without such attachment. The belated attempt to cure jurisdictional defects in replication was insufficient. Therefore, the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the action.

Court Disposition

claim dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs on the ordinary scale