{"issue_text":"Whether applicant should be granted leave to execute judgment pending appeal","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"First Oil appealed Supreme Court judgment ordering refund; CMED fears irreparable harm if execution delayed"}
{"issue_text":"Whether respondent's appeal has reasonable prospects of success","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Respondent challenges court's discretion to order refund based on unjust enrichment; attacks factual findings"}
{"issue_text":"Whether balance of convenience favours granting leave to execute","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Applicant paid large sum received nothing; respondent has no counterclaim; respondent appears to be briefcase company"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
CMED paid US$2.7 million to First Oil for 3 million litres of diesel but failed to pay US$720,000 duty to ZIMRA as required by the agreement. First Oil received payment but never delivered the diesel. CMED sued for specific performance or refund. Tagu J dismissed specific performance due to CMED's breach but ordered First Oil to refund the US$2.7 million. First Oil appealed to Supreme Court and CMED applied for leave to execute pending appeal.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases