Bulawayo High Court has struck off an urgent application by Widerange Technologies (Private) Limited and Benjamin Shoko seeking to stop their eviction by Zimre Property Investments Limited, ruling that it was filed on the basis of a defective certificate of urgency.
Justice Nokuthula Moyo made the determination in a dispute over execution of an eviction order issued under case number HCBC 2513/23.
Widerange Technologies and Shoko sought an order interdicting Zimre Property Investments from proceeding with execution of the writ of ejectment.
The applicants had previously approached the court on March 9, 2026, but that matter was struck off the roll on the understanding that the eviction had been completed.
According to the judgment, the eviction commenced on March 11 and was only partially executed, with the applicants remaining in occupation after securing themselves inside with a padlock.
Moyo found the attempt to revive the dispute as urgent was procedurally defective.
Zimre opposed the application, arguing the certificate of urgency was irregular as it was attested by the applicants’ legal practitioner on March 19, despite the eviction having allegedly occurred on March 10.
The company argued there was no urgency justifying placement on the urgent roll, and accused the applicants of approaching the court with “dirty hands.”
- SA name strong A side for Zim tour
- Cover-up feared in slain CCC activist’s case
- Cover-up feared in slain CCC activist’s case
- Storm clouds over Byo council
Keep Reading
Moyo upheld the objection.
“I find that the certificate of urgency is irregular and defective,” the judge ruled.
The judge said the certificate purported to make an eviction urgent on March 19 when the eviction had already occurred on March 10.
“The legal practitioner attesting to urgency did so without applying their mind to the matter and the events at hand,” e Moyo said.
The court noted the applicants’ affidavit claimed the eviction was only partially carried out, while the sheriff’s return of service stated it was duly executed on March 11.
Moyo said the inconsistency further undermined the claim of urgency.
“There can be no urgency in a bid to stay execution that has already been effected,” the judge ruled.
The matter was struck off the urgent roll, with Zimre awarded costs.
The applicants were represented by Ncube and Partners, while Hove and Associates represented Zimre Property Investments.
