Beverage supplyCredit agreementAcknowledgement of debtSurety bondCorporate personality
Tags
Debt recoverySurety bondAcknowledgement of debtCorporate veil
legislation
Statutes Cited
N
o
n
e
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
–
t
h
e
j
u
d
g
m
e
n
t
r
e
l
i
e
s
e
x
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
l
y
o
n
c
o
m
m
o
n
-
l
a
w
p
r
i
n
c
i
p
l
e
s
o
f
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
,
s
u
r
e
t
y
s
h
i
p
a
n
d
c
i
v
i
l
p
r
o
c
e
d
u
r
e
.
#
#
#
O
T
H
E
R
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
T
I
E
S
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Are all three defendants jointly and severally liable for US$33,876.72?","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Acknowledgement of debt, surety bond, deliveries Nov-Dec 2013"}
{"issue_text":"Is the plaintiff entitled to declare Stand 5276 Budiriro Township specially executable?","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Surety bond executed 16 May 2012, US$48,000 limit"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Plaintiff supplied beverages on credit to defendants from 2009-2014. First and second defendants acknowledged debt of US$22,107 in December 2013; third defendant signed surety bond for US$48,000. Plaintiff claimed US$33,876.72 outstanding. Defendants admitted US$14,528.90 but denied larger balance, alleging payments and cessation of trading.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases