Home » Legal and Judicial Affairs » ’Stop Wasting Court’s Time’

The High Court has censured a former CBZ Bank manager, Mr Claudious Mapedzamombe, who has been fighting to reclaim a house he lost to a city businesswoman over a debt 20 years ago, saying his attempts amounted to abuse of court process.

In a bid to reclaim the Mt Pleasant property, Mr Mapedzamombe reportedly filed more than 18 suits at the High Court.

He also made several approaches to the Supreme Court and magistrates’ courts without any joy.

Dismissing the litigious Mr Mapedzamombe’s latest court application on Wednesday, Justice Nicholas Mathonsi described him as someone who was now taking filing suits as a pastime.

Mr Mapedzamombe did not have legal representation. Aocate Lewis Uriri represented businesswoman Ms Emily Mhini, while Wintertons law firm acted for CBZ, which sold the house to her in 1994. Justice Mathonsi said litiguous drive might top the records in Zimbabwe’s legal history. “It was a display of a never-say-die attitude that may still rank as a record in this country’s legal history only that perhaps no one has ever bothered to document,” he said.

Justice Mathonsi slapped Mr Mapedzamombe with an order for punitive legal costs as a way of expressing the court’s displeasure with his conduct.

“I agree that this is a case calling for punitive costs to be granted against the plaintiff as a seal of the court’s displeasure at such flagrant abuse of its process,” he said. “The defendants have been tied up in footing court proceedings with no chance in the world for success by a persistent and unrepentant litigant with nothing else to do, who appears to take litigation as his favourite pastime.

“In the result, the plaintiff’s claim is hereby dismissed with costs on the scale of legal practitioner and client.”

Justice Mathonsi said the litigation was a form harassment of Ms Mhini and the bank, who found themselves having to attend court time and again.

The court agreed with A Uriri that the matter was prescribed at law and it could not be entertained considering that the proceedings were filed outside the stipulated three-year period.

A Uriri made the point that the plaintiff’s claim was prescribed in terms of the Prescription Act.

Justice Mathonsi agreed with A Uriri that the Supreme Court in 1996 ruled that the property should remain registered under Ms Mhini’s name and that the High Court had no jurisdiction to overturn or interfere with the finding.

In another case, the Constitutional Court has directed that two constitutional challenges by Ms Mhini in which she is seeking stay of prosecution on the 1994 allegations be consolidated.

Ms Mhini was first charged with fraud in the 1990s, but prosecution was declined for want of evidence.

Mr Mapedzamombe successfully obtained a certificate to institute private prosecution and the State later took over prosecution from him.

Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku queried the State’s decision to prosecute Ms Mhini for a 1994 offence before ordering the consolidation of the two constitutional applications.

Source : The Herald

Leave a Reply

Subcribe to my feed Follow on Twitter Like On Facebook Pinterest

Search News


December 2018
« Nov    

Zimbabwe Online News is an interactive website which compiles all form of news and press releases for the visitors.

Read More!