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

Infinity Asset Management Limited v Totenville Investments (Pvt) Limited and 3 Others

HH 483-13

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
18 December 2013
Citation
HH 483-13
Neutral Citation
[2013] ZWHH 483
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Urgent Application

Bench

Presiding
Mathonsi J
Full Bench
Mathonsi J
Areas of Law
Company LawInterdict Law
Keywords
interlocutory interdictprovisional liquidationshare transfercorporate authority
Tags
interdictcompany lawshareholdingprovisional liquidation
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • N
  • o
  • n
  • e
  • n
  • o
  • s
  • t
  • a
  • t
  • u
  • t
  • o
  • r
  • y
  • p
  • r
  • o
  • v
  • i
  • s
  • i
  • o
  • n
  • s
  • w
  • e
  • r
  • e
  • i
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • r
  • p
  • r
  • e
  • t
  • e
  • d
  • o
  • r
  • a
  • p
  • p
  • l
  • i
  • e
  • d
  • i
  • n
  • t
  • h
  • i
  • s
  • j
  • u
  • d
  • g
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • .
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether applicant has established a prima facie right to warrant grant of interlocutory interdict","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Applicant's alleged shareholding in first respondent, transfer of property to second respondent"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether applicant retains any shareholding in first respondent","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"2009 share transfer, current company records"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The applicant company in provisional liquidation sought to prevent transfer of property allegedly owned by its subsidiary, claiming the sale was unauthorized. The court found the applicant had no remaining shareholding in the subsidiary since 2009 and therefore no standing to challenge the sale.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →