Robin Charles Balch versus Wincourt (Private) Limited and Andrew Machiha and Swerma Machiha and Barclays Bank of Zimbabwe Limited and The Registrar of Deeds N.O
{"issue_text":"Whether the removal of the applicant as director was valid","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"CR14 filed on 1 August 2006, applicant's alleged resignation"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the hypothecation of the property in favour of the fourth respondent should be set aside","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Mortgage bond registration, Turquand Rule, Companies Act s12"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the mortgage bond in favour of the fourth respondent is illegal and should be cancelled","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Banking facility, company resolution, fourth respondent's good faith"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Applicant was a 25% shareholder and co-director of first respondent company which owned property. Second respondent became 75% shareholder in 2006 and allegedly forged applicant's resignation from directorship. Company used property as security for banking facility without applicant's knowledge. Applicant seeks reinstatement as director and cancellation of mortgage bond.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases