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

Stanbic Nominees Private Limited and Stanbic Bank Zimbabwe Limited v Remo Investment Brokers (Private) Limited

HH 354/13

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
16 October 2013
Citation
HH 354/13
Neutral Citation
[2013] ZWHH 354
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Application

Bench

Presiding
Mtshiya J
Full Bench
Mtshiya J
Areas of Law
Civil ProcedureCommercial Law
Keywords
Anton Piller orderBinding effectParty citationDeclaratory order
Tags
Anton Piller orderDeclaratory reliefParty citation
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • E
  • u
  • r
  • o
  • p
  • e
  • a
  • n
  • C
  • o
  • n
  • v
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • i
  • o
  • n
  • o
  • n
  • H
  • u
  • m
  • a
  • n
  • R
  • i
  • g
  • h
  • t
  • s
  • 1
  • 9
  • 5
  • 0
  • H
  • u
  • m
  • a
  • n
  • R
  • i
  • g
  • h
  • t
  • s
  • A
  • c
  • t
  • 1
  • 9
  • 9
  • 8
  • C
  • r
  • i
  • m
  • e
  • (
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • )
  • A
  • c
  • t
  • 1
  • 9
  • 9
  • 7
  • C
  • r
  • i
  • m
  • i
  • n
  • a
  • l
  • J
  • u
  • s
  • t
  • i
  • c
  • e
  • A
  • c
  • t
  • 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 3
  • I
  • m
  • p
  • r
  • i
  • s
  • o
  • n
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • f
  • o
  • r
  • P
  • u
  • b
  • l
  • i
  • c
  • P
  • r
  • o
  • t
  • e
  • c
  • t
  • i
  • o
  • n
  • (
  • A
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • d
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • )
  • R
  • u
  • l
  • e
  • s
  • 2
  • 0
  • 1
  • 5
  • P
  • r
  • i
  • s
  • o
  • n
  • R
  • u
  • l
  • e
  • s
  • 1
  • 9
  • 9
  • 9
  • L
  • i
  • f
  • e
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • (
  • N
  • o
  • r
  • t
  • h
  • e
  • r
  • n
  • I
  • r
  • e
  • l
  • a
  • n
  • d
  • )
  • O
  • r
  • d
  • e
  • r
  • 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 1
  • L
  • i
  • f
  • e
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • (
  • R
  • e
  • v
  • i
  • e
  • w
  • o
  • f
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • )
  • R
  • u
  • l
  • e
  • s
  • 2
  • 0
  • 0
  • 7
  • L
  • i
  • f
  • e
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • (
  • R
  • e
  • v
  • i
  • e
  • w
  • o
  • f
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • )
  • (
  • A
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • d
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • )
  • R
  • u
  • l
  • e
  • s
  • 2
  • 0
  • 1
  • 5
  • L
  • i
  • f
  • e
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • (
  • R
  • e
  • v
  • i
  • e
  • w
  • o
  • f
  • S
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • e
  • n
  • c
  • e
  • s
  • )
  • (
  • A
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • d
  • m
  • e
  • n
  • t
  • )
  • R
  • u
  • l
  • e
  • s
  • 2
  • 0
  • 1
  • 8
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether an Anton Piller order is binding on entities that are not cited as parties to the application but whose premises are listed for search","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Applicants were not cited as parties but their premises were listed for search"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The respondent obtained an Anton Piller order against various entities to search for and seize share certificates. The applicants, who were listed in the order as premises to be searched but were not cited as parties to the application, sought a declaratory order that the orders were not binding on them.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →