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

ZHAKATA TAPFUMANEYI and HARARE SOUTH RESIDENCE ASSOCIATION and HARARE SOUTH CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT and LUSTY MUSAYANEMBEU versus XINFENG LI and JACOB ZVOMUNYA and BERNADINO MUVADI and KUDZAI KARIMAZONDO and RANGARIRAI MUZVANYA and KINGSTON KAHIYA and EDMOND NYAMUKAPA and DORCA ARIFANDIKA and TECLAR CHAGWAMBARE and CHITSANGA DANIEL and CANELS. MAKUREYA and JOSSIPHINE SIBANDA and SHEALAH MUSHANINGA and ANYWILL CHIMUGOTI and KUDZANAI DUVE and WINNET CHIDHONZA and IRINE MABHIZA and NORMAN MANJENGWA and CHRISTINA MUPFATSO and LILIOSAL TSINGARWO and GETRUDE NGANDU and PEPUKAI MADIMBO and SHEPHARD MUDZONGA and RUTH ZVIMBA and LETWIN DURA and MAILELE CHIGARIRO and WILBERT K. MUROZVI and PATRICK MUTASA and PRECIOUS RUGARA and MOLLINE CHUMA and TECLAR CHIGARA and VIOLAH MAGAUZE and WILSON MUCHADAKUENDA and GILBERT MUROVE and BHIMOS MHURIENGWE and ALICE MAGUTA and CORNSTANCE JAKARASI and CHRISTINA NYAMHARAPARE and OTILLIA CHINZARA and DAVID SHERENI and MEKUSI KENIAS MAPLANKA and EMMA KISS and ELIAS SAMSON and SARUDZAI KARIMAZONDO and CHRISTINA RONDODZAI and JULIET MUKOMBWA and ANNIE CHIWARA and BENHILDA MARISA and TAVAKAYI CHIHEYA and PRINCE NHERERA and FAINES PARIKUSARA and VENDA BUMHIRA and RODGERS MUSEMWA and TRYPHINE SIBANDA and JOHWANIS CHINOMWE and ELIZABETH NYAMUKAPA and MEGGIE PIKI and EDSON MUDZVITI and KUDAKWASHE MUJURU and GLADYS ZARANYIKA and RUDO MUSHAMBI and KETINA MUPARADZI and SIBONIKHULE NDLOVU and EZIUS KUMUTSUNGIRA and FINANCE MUBAIWA and ALBERT MAKONDO and STARNLY CHIGWEREMBA and TABARIRA N. KUFA and JESI MUDZONGA and RHODA KAUNDO and SCOLASTIC MARWI and SAMUEL HONDO and SOPHIA CHIDEMBO and SIMON MUBARIRI and NORMEN MAJEGWA and EVERJOICE PANGANAI v XINFENG LI

HH 430 - 25

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
16 July 2025
Citation
HH 430 - 25
Neutral Citation
[2025] ZWHH 430
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Urgent Application

Bench

Presiding
ZHOU J
Full Bench
ZHOU J
Areas of Law
Civil ProcedureProperty LawAdministrative Law
Keywords
UrgencyMaterial non-disclosureStay of executionEjectmentWrit
Tags
Urgent Chamber applicationStay of executionRescission of judgmentEjectment
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • HIGH COURT ACT
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether the matter is urgent","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Awareness of proceedings in 2024, failure to act expeditiously"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether there was material non-disclosure and falsehoods","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Non-disclosure of involvement in HCH 2277/24, false claims about land allocation"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the third and fourth applicants are properly before the court","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"No affidavits deposed to by these applicants"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The applicants sought an urgent stay of execution of an ejectment order granted in HCH 2637/20, pending an application for rescission of judgment. The first respondent opposed the application on the grounds that it was not urgent and that the applicants had made material falsehoods and failed to disclose their prior involvement in related litigation.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →