Judgment No. CCZ 8/14 1
Constitutional Court Application No. CCZ 45/14
DISTRIBUTED BY VERITAS
e-mail: veritas@mango.zw; website: www.veritaszim.net
Veritas makes every effort to ensure the provision of reliable information,
but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied .
DISTRIBUTABLE (4)
STREAMSLEIGH
INVESTMENTS
(PRIVATE)
LIMITED
v
AUTOBAND
INVESTMENTS
(PRIVATE)
LIMITED
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ZIMBABWE
HARARE, JULY 3 & 24, 2014
A P de Bourbon SC, for the applicant
L Uriri, for the respondent
Before: CHIDYAUSIKU, CJ, In Chambers
The facts of this case are lengthy and fairly complex, but have been fairly
summarised by GOWORA J in judgment no. SC 43/14.
There is no point in regurgitating
them. However, I will restate some of the facts for the purpose of providing a context to this
judgment.
The respondent, Autoband Investments (Private) Limited (“Autoband”),
launched spoliation proceedings seeking to evict African Medical Investments (Private)
Limited (“AMI”) from No. 15 Lanark Road, Belgravia, Harare (“the premises”) in the
magistrate’s court.
The present applicant, Streamsleigh Investments (Private) Limited
(“Streamsleigh”) was not cited as a respondent in those proceedings although it contended
that it was in occupation of the premises as owner of the premises.
It follows from this
contention that, according to Streamsleigh, Autoband was suing the wrong party. Although