HH 319-18 PETER KULERA and Anor versus SPENBRIDGE TRUCKING (PRIVATE) LIMITED and Anor

PETER KULERA

and

KULTRANS INTERNATIONAL (PRIVATE) LIMITED

versus

SPENBRIDGE TRUCKING (PRIVATE) LIMITED

and

SHERIFF OF ZIMBABWE

 

 

 

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

KWENDA J

HARARE, 29, 30 May 2018 and 13 June 2018

 

 

 

Urgent Chamber Application

 

 

C. Nyika, for the applicants

Ms P. C Nyandoro, for the applicants

 

 

            KWENDA J: The application before me suffers from many defects and deficiencies.

            While the court condoned some of the defects it became clearer during argument that the other deficiencies were incurable.

            The application runs fowl of r 241 (1) of the High Court rules:

            “1.       A chamber application shall be made by means of an entry in the chamber book and

shall be accompanied by Form 29B duly completed and, except as is provided in subr (2) shall be supported by one or more affidavits setting out the facts upon which the applicant relies.

 

Provided that where chamber applications it to be served on an interested party it shall be on Form 29 with appropriate modification.”

 

            The present application is not on Form 29. It is on Form 29B. It does not comply with the rules. I take judicial notice of the fact that the demand for strict adherence to the proviso to r 241 (1) is a recent development.            In the recent past urgent applications were submitted on Form 29B and the courts seemed to overlook that.

            There is however a new trend to routinely object to the use of Form 29B in a chamber application to be served on an interested party.

            The application of the proviso to r 241 (1) is discussed in the case of Marick Trading (Pvt) Ltd v Old Mutual Life Assurance Co. of Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd & Sheriff for Zimbabwe HH 

Download File: 

Tags: 

2018