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

Zvikomborero Murahwi v Pam Golding Properties

HH 491/25

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
1 September 2025
Citation
HH 491/25
Neutral Citation
[2025] ZWHH 491
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Trial

Bench

Presiding
Mushure J
Full Bench
Mushure J
Areas of Law
Contract LawAgency LawProperty Law
Keywords
Principal and AgentMandateRemittanceRBZ ApprovalLiquidity CrisisDeclaratory OrderContractual Damages
Tags
AgencyContractPropertyForeign Currency
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • High Court Act
  • Civil Evidence Act
  • Exchange Control Regulations
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration that the defendant is indebted to him in the sum of USD 168,127.02.","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Defendant received funds, failed to remit, plaintiff instructed transfer to conveyancers."}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the defendant is liable to pay contractual damages for breach of the agency contract.","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Defendant's failure to timeously remit funds, failure to cancel sale agreement."}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the defendant breached its mandate agreement by failing to remit the funds.","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Plaintiff's instructions to transfer funds to conveyancers."}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the defendant dispensed with its obligation to remit the funds upon plaintiff's instruction.","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Plaintiff's email instructions on 10 and 11 September 2018."}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the defendant still holds money on behalf of the plaintiff.","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Funds transferred to and held by conveyancers."}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the defendant was responsible for cancelling the sale agreement.","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Defendant was not a party to the agreement of sale."}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The plaintiff, needing funds for his child's medical expenses, mandated the defendant, a real estate agent, to sell his property. The property was sold for US$190,000, but due to Zimbabwe's liquidity crisis and subsequent regulatory changes, the plaintiff did not receive the proceeds. The plaintiff claimed the defendant breached the agency agreement by failing to remit the funds in US dollars and by not cancelling the sale agreement. The defendant argued it had complied with the plaintiff's subsequent instructions to transfer the funds to the conveyancers for remittance and was not a party to the sale agreement.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →