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

Interfin Banking Corporation Limited t/a Interfin Bank (Under Curatorship) v Goldlock Industries 2003 (Private) Limited and Zvenyika Mhendurwa and Evelyn Mhendurwa

HH 306-13

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
3 September 2013
Citation
HH 306-13
Neutral Citation
[2013] ZWHH 306
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Application

Bench

Presiding
Takuva J
Full Bench
Takuva J
Areas of Law
Banking LawCivil Procedure
Keywords
provisional sentencemortgage bondsuretyshipliquid document
Tags
provisional sentencemortgage bondsuretyshipbanking
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • High Court Rules, 1971
  • High Court Rules, 1971
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether the plaintiff complied with Rule 24 requiring particulars of notice given when claiming provisional sentence on a mortgage bond","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Plaintiff's summons stated amount due but gave no notice particulars"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the certificate of indebtedness is a liquid document for provisional sentence purposes","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Certificate attached but not a demand notice"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The plaintiff bank claimed provisional sentence for USD 433,046.28 based on a mortgage bond and suretyships. The defendants opposed on multiple grounds including that the amount claimed exceeded the bond capital of USD 160,000 and that Rule 24 compliance was absent.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →