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

Akindele Popoola Akinjide-Obonyo v Clever Mandizvidza N.O. (Estate Late Millicent Tutsimane Tandile Akinjide-Obonyo) and Innocent Gonese N.O. and Lathizile Nondaba Akinjide-Obinyo

HH 34-23

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
19 January 2023
Citation
HH 34-23
Neutral Citation
[2023] ZWHH 34
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Application

Bench

Presiding
Chinamora J
Full Bench
Chinamora J
Areas of Law
Family LawCivil Procedure
Keywords
rescissionconsent orderdivorce decreerule 449absence of party
Tags
rescission of judgmentconsent orderdivorceestate administration
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • High Court Rules, 1971
  • High Court Rules
  • High Court Rules (previous)
  • High Court Rules, 1971
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether the applicant satisfies requirements of rule 449 (1) (a) for rescission of consent order","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Consent order granted with applicant represented by counsel; applicant admitted divorce date in previous affidavit"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The applicant sought rescission of a consent divorce order granted in 2002, claiming it was erroneously granted in his absence. He discovered the order's existence in 2020 during estate administration meetings after his wife's death. The respondents opposed, arguing the applicant was represented by counsel when the order was granted.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →