MATIPANO v GOLD DRIVEN INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD 2014 (1) ZLR 344 (S)

2014 (1) ZLR p344

Flynote

Enrichment – unjust enrichment – fees payable to deputy sheriff – fees demanded in excess of applicable tariff – payer entitled to recover excess – allegation that payment made voluntarily – payment made under colour of office – parties not on equal footing – payer entitled to recover

Practice and procedure – parties – locus standi – judgment debtor – writ of execution – deputy sheriff's commission – liability of judgment debtor to pay such commission – locus standi of judgment debtor to claim refund of excess commission wrongfully paid

Practice and procedure – sale in execution – fees due to deputy sheriff – applicable tariff – tariff in force at time of relevant transaction governs fees due – by whom fees payable – owner of goods attached – fees payable by such person, not by judgment creditor – excessive commission paid as a result by judgment debtor – payment wrongfully made colore officii – illegality of payment – judgment debtor entitled to claim refund of the excess paid by him to the deputy sheriff

Words and phrases – "cause of action" – meaning of – means the entire set of facts which gives rise to an enforceable claim

Words and phrases – "colore officii" – colour of office – meaning of when it arises in the context of a claim for a refund of monies illegally taken by a public official from a member of the public