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

Ezekiel Chinoingira v Balwearie Holdings (Private) Limited and Sabre Services (Private) Limited

High Court of Zimbabwe, Harare14 September 2021
HH 480-21HH 480-212021
Viewing: Word Document
Loading document...
Full text archive

Judgment text copy

A clean reading copy is shown below. Use Download for the original formatted document.
### Preamble
1
HH 480-21
HC 4236/21
---------


EZEKIEL CHINOINGIRA

versus

BALWEARE HOLDINGS (PRIVATE) LIMITED

and

SABRE SERVICES (PRIVATE) LIMITED

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

MUCHAWA J

HARARE,3 & 14 September 2021

Urgent chamber application

C.T. Tinarwo, for the applicant

No appearance the 1st respondent

H.T. Mawema, for the 2nd respondent

MUCHAWA J: This is an urgent chamber application in which the interim relief sought is that 1st respondent be barred and interdicted from evicting the applicant from a certain farm known as “the remainder of Westhey, Sabonabon Estate, Kadoma arbitrarily without a court order. As a final order, it is prayed that the provisional order be confirmed with respondents paying costs.

The applicant dragged to court, an entity called Balwearie Holdings Private Limited whose particulars were provided as a company registered under company number 45/77 as first respondent and second respondent is Sabre Services Private Limited, a company which is cited in its capacity as the first respondent’s company secretary.

Points in limine were taken by the second respondent. The first, which was backed by an order under case number HC 2860/20 which is extant, clearly showed that the 1st respondent was held to be dissolved by that court order. The effect of dissolution of a company is that its legal personality comes to an end. It ceases to exist. It cannot sue or be sued. See Bowman NO v Sacks and Ors 1986 (4) SA 459 (W) @463G-H. This means there is no legal persona responding to the first respondent.

As second respondent was sued as secretary of a nonexistent entity, it too cannot be properly dragged to court. Further, a company cannot be a secretary of another company.

Consequently, there are no respondents before me. I uphold the points in limine. The appropriate remedy is to strike off this matter with an order of costs on an ordinary scale.

Zimudzi & Partners, applicant’s legal practitioners