Category: Legal Resources

Double Sales – Property

DOUBLE SALES

Have you ever found yourself in a situation where you find out that a property that you have purchased was sold to someone else as well? If the answer to this question is Yes, then this article is for you.

The concept of double sales came about as a result of the greedy and dishonest nature that individuals possess. As a result, citizens are duped / defrauded of their hard earned money and are conned into purchasing properties that may have already been sold to someone else. Double sales may be defined as the corrupt or rather fraudulent sale of property by one (the seller) to at least two different parties (the purchasers).

Members of the public are strongly advised by the to conduct a Deeds search at the Deeds Registry in either Bulawayo or Harare depending on where the property that one intends to purchase is located, prior to concluding the sale. This will save a lot of clients from possibly falling victim to these criminals that sell the same property more than once.

The Deeds search provides following information;

  • That the Deed actually exists and is registered in the system (that it is not a fake Title deed)
  • The details of the owner such as their name, date of birth and Identity number.
  • Extent (size) of the property
  • Where the property is situated (accurate property description)
  • Conditions imposed on the property
  • Date of registration
  • Whether the property has been pledged as security (collateral) for a loan

After having done the initial Deeds search one can then trace all prior Deeds and previous owners of the property, leading up to the current Title Deed.

The above mentioned measure is a precautionary one but in the event that one has already succumbed to such a scam then they may resort to the Courts for recourse. The remedy that is available to parties is making a claim in the Courts for specific performance for one party and a claim for damages for the other party. A criminal case may also be pursued against the seller in such a case. One may note that in the case of the two purchasers the Courts tend to favour the first buyer as opposed to the second one especially where transfer has not been effected, this stance was highlighted in the decided case of Guga v Moyo & Ors where it was held that;

“the basic rule in double sales where transfer has not been passed to either party is that the first purchaser should succeed. The first in time is the stronger in law. The second purchaser is left with a claim for damages from the seller, which is usually small comfort. But the rule applies only in the absence of special circumstances affecting the balance of equities”.

There are instances where the second buyer was aware of the first sale and in such cases the courts exercise no leniency towards the second buyer as they willingly entered into a fraudulent sale however such a party can lay a claim against the seller for funds paid.

There are some exceptions to the position that the first purchaser is given preference over the second buyer and the circumstances have been laid out in case law. The court tends to look at the balance of equity and as a result of such there are instances where the second purchaser may be awarded the property instead of the first purchaser such as that the second purchaser was not aware of the first sale and/or the second purchaser has made improvements to the property and/or transfer of the property has been done in favour of the second purchaser. In such instances the Court reserves the right to make a ruling that the property be awarded to the second purchaser. The Court exercises its discretion in matters of such a nature.

In the event that you have been a victim of such a circumstance please do not hesitate to engage our team of legal practitioners that is ready to assist.

 

This article is for general information purposes only-seek the professional legal advice.

Watching Brief

A watching brief is a legal process in which a legal practitioner observes and monitors the arrest and prosecution of an accused person, to ensure that the law as well as due process are upheld.

The legal practitioner will be acting under the instruction of a client, who is either the complainant or the victim in the matter. The role of the legal practitioner is to observe and ensure that the law is complied with, securing a conviction is not one of the duties of the legal practitioner.

Usually, criminal prosecutions are done at the instance of the State (prosecutor) who represents the complainant and/or the victims, and in instances of a watching brief the legal practitioner works with the prosecution to ensure that criminal procedure and the law are observed during the course of the trial. Some of the other duties that a legal practitioner may perform include ensuring that the accused is charged correctly; that the charge sheet and State outline are properly drafted, that the rightful witnesses are selected and their statements are recorded, the rightful evidence is secured and presented at trial, and helping to prepare questions to be asked during trial.

Take note that a watching brief is not exercised in a bid to undermine the State. A legal practitioner has no audience with the court and will only introduce themselves at the beginning of the case, anything else that they want to say shall be done through the prosecutor as the prosecution is trying the case. There are some advantages to such process as it reduces the chances of bribery of either the Judicial officer and or prosecutor; ensures that no deliberate efforts by the prosecutor to have the accused acquitted prevail, and allowing for the prevalence of justice.

The watching brief process is very useful as it tends to reduce instances of corruption or bribery of the state and or police officials by the accused person or their relatives (not the case in all instances).

 

This article is for general information purposes only. Seek legal advice from your Lawyer

 

Constitutional Rights Of Arrested Or Detained Persons

Constitutional Rights Of Arrested Or Detained Persons – Section 50

1. Section 50(1) of the Constitution provides that a person arrested or detained must:

  • be informed at the time of arrest of the reason for the arrest;
  • be permitted, without delay—
  • at the expense of the State, to contact their spouse or partner, or a relative or legal practitioner, or anyone else of their choice; and
  • at their own expense, to consult in private with a legal practitioner and a medical practitioner of their choice, and must be informed of this right promptly;
  • be treated humanely and with respect for their inherent dignity;
  • be released unconditionally or on reasonable conditions, pending a charge or trial, unless there are compelling reasons justifying their continued detention; and
  • must be permitted to challenge the lawfulness of the arrest in person before a court and must be released promptly if the arrest is unlawful. 

2. Section 50(4) provides that a person who is arrested or detained for an alleged offence has the right—

  • to remain silent;
  • to be informed promptly of their right to remain silent and of the consequences of remaining silent and of not remaining silent;
  • not to be compelled to make any confession or admission; and
  • at the first court appearance after being arrested, to be charged or to be informed of the reason why their detention should continue, or to be released. 

3. Section 50(5) provides that a person who is detained, including a sentenced prisoner, has the right—

  • to be informed promptly of the reason for their being detained;
  • at their own expense, to consult in private with a legal practitioner of their choice, and to be informed of this right promptly;
  • to communicate with, and be visited by a spouse or partner, a relative, the person’s chosen religious counselor, the person’s chosen legal practitioner, the person’s chosen medical practitioner and subject to reasonable restrictions imposed for the proper administration of prisons or places of detention, anyone else of the person’s choice;
  • to conditions of detention that are consistent with human dignity, including the opportunity for physical exercise and the provision, at State expense, of adequate accommodation, ablution facilities, personal hygiene, nutrition, appropriate reading material and medical treatment;
  • to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in person before a court and, if the detention is unlawful, to be released promptly.