Back to top
Zalari has raised $2 million USD in a founding round led by Nyamaropa Technologies
Harare High Court

NU-AERO (PRIVATE) LIMITED t/a FLY AFRICA ZIMBABWE and CASSIDY MUGWAGWA v DETECT INVESTMENTS (PRIVATE) LIMITED and THE SHERIFF FOR ZIMBABWE and THE REGISTRAR OF THE HIGH COURT

HH 681-17

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
5 October 2017
Citation
HH 681-17
Neutral Citation
[2017] ZWHH 681
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Urgent Application

Bench

Presiding
CHITAKUNYE J
Full Bench
CHITAKUNYE J
Areas of Law
Civil ProcedureCommercial Law
Keywords
Stay of executionProvisional orderUrgent chamber applicationAd factum praestandumWrit of execution
Tags
Stay of executionProvisional orderUrgent application
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • High Court Rules, 1971
  • High Court Rules, 1971
  • High Court Rules, 1971
  • High Court Rules, 1971
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether the court should grant a stay of execution pending determination of rescission application","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Provisional order obtained without proper service; rescission application pending"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the writ of execution issued was competent","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Order was ad factum praestandum; no service before writ issued"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The applicants sought a stay of execution of a provisional order obtained by the first respondent, alleging improper procedure. The first respondent had initially filed an urgent chamber application which was deemed not urgent by a judge, but then proceeded to enrol it on the unopposed roll and obtained a default provisional order without proper service on the applicants.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →