Mahachi & Anor v Chazovachii & Ors (CIV A 140 of 2013) [2015] ZWHHC 516 (9 June 2015)

Mahachi & Anor v Chazovachii & Ors (CIV A 140 of 2013) [2015] ZWHHC 516 (9 June 2015)

The respondent performed his obligations under the agreement of sale by paying the purchase price as agreed. The contract was valid and enforceable as both parties believed the investment company was lawful, and the appellants benefited from the arrangement before the company's collapse. The remedy for the appellants lies against the company, not the respondent.

Citation
[2015] ZWHHC 516
Parties
Appellant: William Mahachi; Appellant: Rabecca Mahachi; Respondent: Bernard Chazovachii; Respondent: City of Masvingo; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds; Respondent: The Messenger of Court, Masvingo
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
9 June 2015
Case Number
CIV A 140 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Illegality of Contract, Agreement of Sale, Transfer of Property
Source Language
English
Contract Law Property Law Specific Performance Illegality of Contract Agreement of Sale Transfer of Property

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Mahachi

Appellant

Rabecca Mahachi

Appellant

Bernard Chazovachii

Respondent

City of Masvingo

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

The Messenger of Court, Masvingo

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrate erred in enforcing a contract tainted with illegality
  2. 2 Whether the respondent performed his obligations under the agreement of sale and is entitled to transfer

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent performed his obligations under the agreement of sale by paying the purchase price as agreed. The contract was valid and enforceable as both parties believed the investment company was lawful, and the appellants benefited from the arrangement before the company's collapse. The remedy for the appellants lies against the company, not the respondent.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.