domestic violenceprotection ordercustomary law unionmatrimonial propertyinterdict
Tags
domestic violencecustomary law unionproperty rightsprotection order
legislation
Statutes Cited
Domestic Violence Act
Magistrates Court Act
High Court Act
Matrimonial Causes Act
Maintenance Act
Labour Act
Deeds Registries Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether an appeal lies against a judgment under the Domestic Violence Act which makes no provision for appeals","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"DVA silent on appeals, matter heard by magistrates court"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the interdict against selling the house was properly granted under the DVA","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"House registered in appellant's name, parties not legally married, respondent claims contributions"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The parties entered into a customary law union in 2002 and have two children. The appellant owned house number 50 Banister Road Braeside, Harare, registered in his name since 1996. The respondent alleged she contributed to paying off the bond. The magistrates court granted a protection order interdicting the appellant from selling the house without consent. The appellant appealed.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases