{"issue_text":"Whether defendant is entitled to share in Selfast Industries (Private) Limited","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Business incorporated after separation; plaintiff in sole control; defendant claims contribution through Shambidzo Investments"}
{"issue_text":"Whether defendant proved claim for arrear maintenance","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Defendant's bank statements; plaintiff paid school fees; no evidence of total expenses"}
{"issue_text":"Whether amendment to introduce marital misconduct should be allowed","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Amendment filed out of time; no condonation sought"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Parties married in 1981, separated in 1987, four adult children. Both sought divorce and division of matrimonial estate comprising immovable properties and two companies. Plaintiff conceded his half shares in three properties to defendant. Dispute remained over shares in Crovis Agencies and Selfast Industries companies and arrear maintenance claim.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases