ResettlementEvictionMaster planLand use changeProvisional order
Tags
Land acquisitionResettlementUrban developmentEviction
legislation
Statutes Cited
N
o
s
t
a
t
u
t
e
,
A
c
t
,
o
r
c
o
d
i
f
i
e
d
i
n
s
t
r
u
m
e
n
t
w
a
s
q
u
o
t
e
d
,
i
n
t
e
r
p
r
e
t
e
d
,
o
r
a
p
p
l
i
e
d
.
T
h
e
e
n
t
i
r
e
d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
r
e
s
t
s
o
n
t
h
e
H
i
g
h
C
o
u
r
t
’
s
i
n
h
e
r
e
n
t
p
o
w
e
r
t
o
g
r
a
n
t
u
r
g
e
n
t
i
n
t
e
r
i
m
r
e
l
i
e
f
a
n
d
o
n
g
e
n
e
r
a
l
c
o
m
m
o
n
-
l
a
w
p
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
o
f
n
a
t
u
r
a
l
j
u
s
t
i
c
e
.
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether applicants are entitled to a provisional order preventing their eviction pending finalization of related litigation","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Threat of eviction, pending case HC 8451/2012"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicants, who were settled by government on Mabula resettlement area between 1983-1985, sought to prevent their eviction after the area was incorporated into the Zvishavane Master Plan for urban development. They alleged threats of forced removal without proper process.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases