Law Portal
Zimbabwe

Welcome To Law Portal

Welcome, Guest!
[Help?]

Land Acquisition re: Eviction, Offer Letters and the Lawful Authority to Occupy Gazetted Land

HH25-12 : TAFIREYI NYIKADZINO vs JOHN CAMERO ASHER AND TWO OTHERS
Ruled By: BHUNU J

The spoliation order was issued before the Supreme Court had clarified the law in respect of land disputes of this nature. Since then, the Supreme Court has clarified the law in the landmark decision of Commercial Farmers Union 9 Ors v The Minister of Lands and Rural Resettlement 6 ...
More

HH25-12 : TAFIREYI NYIKADZINO vs JOHN CAMERO ASHER AND TWO OTHERS
Ruled By: BHUNU J

On the strength of the law, as now articulated by the Supreme Court, it would appear that the first respondent may have been divested of any right to own, occupy and use the land in dispute. His intended occupation of the land now constitutes a criminal offence and the court cannot sanction an illegality.
More

HH25-12 : TAFIREYI NYIKADZINO vs JOHN CAMERO ASHER AND TWO OTHERS
Ruled By: BHUNU J

...,. I am mindful of the first respondent's argument that peri-urban land is not susceptible to compulsory acquisition. That position, however, needs to be clarified by the Supreme Court before the first respondent can lawfully occupy the disputed land.
More

HH111-12 : DARLINGTON SIREWU vs WAYNE (GALLOP) SWALES AND ANOTHER
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

It is not in issue that the farm was acquired by the State. It therefore falls into that category of property referred to as "gazette land".the applicant is in possession of a valid offer letter to occupy and utilize the farm or such portion thereof.the first respondent has not been authorized by means of ...
More

HH111-12 : DARLINGTON SIREWU vs WAYNE (GALLOP) SWALES AND ANOTHER
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

The first respondent has no leg to stand on. His legal position may be summarized by reference to certain pronouncements by the Supreme Court that: "On the other hand, section 3 of the of the Gazetted Land (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28] criminalizes the continued occupation of acquired land by owners or occupiers of land ...
More

HB19-12 : WILD GOOSE SAFARIS (PVT) LTD vs SIPHO MPOFU AND TWO OTHERS
Ruled By: NDOU J

It is common cause that prior to the acquisition by the Government, the property was known as Lot 3A, Dete Valley 3, Gwayi Conservancy., upon such acquisition by the State, the previous title and ownership of the said land was extinguished.The Government, in its wisdom, subdivided Lot 3A.these subdivisions were offered to three beneficiaries by ...
More

HH34-09 : JOHN CAMERON ASHER vs MINISTER OF STATE RESPONSIBLE FOR NATIONALL SECURITY, LANDS, LAND REFORM AND RESETTLEMENT IN THE PRESIDENT'S OFFICE AND T. NYIKADZINO
Ruled By: CHATUKUTA J

Section 3 of the Gazetted Land (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28] provides what is required to be done to evict the applicant from the farm. The provision does not, in my view, relate to the main homestead only. It appears it relates to the entire farm that has been gazetted. Section 3(3) of the ...
More

HH38-09 : JOHN LANDA NKOMO vs LANGTON T MASUNDA
Ruled By: BHUNU J

The applicant and the respondent are both beneficiaries of the Land Reform and Resettlement Scheme Model A2 Programme...Because of the historical ownership of the land in question by one former owner, the boundaries of the two farms were not clearly defined at the time of allocation of the land to the two beneficiaries, thereby giving ...
More

HH38-09 : JOHN LANDA NKOMO vs LANGTON T MASUNDA
Ruled By: BHUNU J

Mr.Nkomo has since taken occupation of the disputed Jijima Lodge...his occupation of the lodge is apparently lawful in that he is occupying immovable property on land lawfully allocated to him by the acquiring authority pursuant to a lawful court order issued by a competent court of competent jurisdiction. Mr.Masunda's intended reoccupation and use of the lodge ...
More

HH38-09 : JOHN LANDA NKOMO vs LANGTON T MASUNDA
Ruled By: BHUNU J

The purpose of the courts is to do justice according to law and not to facilitate its abrogation. The words of MALABA DCJ in...are germane to this case. In that case the learned Deputy Chief Justice observed that: "An interim interdict as a remedy for the prohibition of unlawful conduct could not be granted for the ...
More

HH34-09 : JOHN CAMERON ASHER vs MINISTER OF STATE RESPONSIBLE FOR NATIONALL SECURITY, LANDS, LAND REFORM AND RESETTLEMENT IN THE PRESIDENT'S OFFICE AND T. NYIKADZINO
Ruled By: CHATUKUTA J

The second respondent submitted that the offer letter was, therefore, a valid defence to spoliation. It is my considered view that an offer letter cannot be a defence because of the requirements of section 3(5) of the Gazetted Lands (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28]. Section 3(1) of the Gazetted Lands (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28] precludes any ...
More

HH40-09 : DODHILL (PVT) LTD and SIMON KEEVIL vs THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and NYASHA CHIKAFU
Ruled By: BERE J

The first applicant is Dodhill (Pvt) Ltd, a company with limited liability duly registered in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe. The second applicant is the director and shareholder of the first applicant.The first respondent is the Minister of Lands and Rural Resettlement, cited in his capacity as the acquiring ...
More

HH14-08 : MOUNT LOTHIAN ESTATE (PVT) LTD vs COLONEL GODFREY MUTEMACHANI & 2 OTHERS
Ruled By: BHUNU J

Despite the initial animosity, the antagonists..., sat down at a round table conference where they hammered out an agreement in which they agreed that the two new farmers would support the plaintiff's application to Government to be allowed to retain a portion of the land on condition the applicant assisted them in their farming activities. The agreement ...
More

HH14-08 : MOUNT LOTHIAN ESTATE (PVT) LTD vs COLONEL GODFREY MUTEMACHANI & 2 OTHERS
Ruled By: BHUNU J

The plaintiff now challenges the legality of the acquisition of the farm prior to..., when the farm was finally acquired in terms of Constitutional Amendment Number 17. In respect of the legality or otherwise of the acquisition during the period under review, the plaintiff and the third defendant have filed a statement of agreed facts in the ...
More

HH128-09 : ROUTE TOUTE BV & OTHERS vs MINISTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY RESPONSIBLE FOR LAND LAND REFORM AND RESETTLEMENT & OTHERS
Ruled By: PATEL J

The 1st applicant in this matter is a business corporation registered in the Netherlands. The other three applicants are commercial farming entities registered in Zimbabwe. The applicants together, directly or indirectly, are the registered owners and leaseholders of Fangudu Farm (the farm). They claim the right to continue to own ...
More

HH148-09 : BOK ESTATES (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs HUBERT MASARA AND MR MASARA AND MR MAKANDA AND MINISTER OF STATE FOR NATIONAL SECURITY, LANDS, LAND REFORM AND SETTLEMENT
Ruled By: BERE J

It was argued by counsel for the first and second respondents that upon the acquisition of the farm in question by the State, on 1 February 2008, the applicant ought to have vacated the farm after ninety days of such acquisition in accordance with section 3(2) of the Gazetted Land (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28]. ...
More

HB102-09 : ERMANUS GERHADUS GROVE vs MARTIN MAKONESE and MRS MARWISA and MR CHIGARIRO
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

The applicant is a farmer who purchased Inogo Ranch in 1990, which was then 1,600 hectares in extent. In 2001, the farm was advertised for acquisition by the Government. In May 2002, he entered into an Agreement with the Government in terms of which he agreed to downsize the ranch, with 1,100 hectares being ...
More

HH06-10 : HARLAND BROTHERS (PVT) LIMITED and RAYMOND FINAUGHTY vs THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and MRS WINNIE MUSHIPE
Ruled By: MUSAKWA J

Counsel for the respondent submitted that taking into account the expiration of the notice given to the applicants to vacate the land, in terms of section 3(2)(i) of the Gazetted Land (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28], the applicants are in occupation of the land in defiance of the law as they have no lawful authority ...
More

HH19-10 : FORRESTER ESTATE (PRIVATE) LIMITED vs M.C.R. VENGESAYI and THE MINISTER OF LANDS IN THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND CABINET
Ruled By: PATEL J

Prospects of Success on Appeal I now turn to consider the rights and status of the first respondent under the offer letter issued to him by the second respondent. Despite the position taken in Top Crop 1976 (Pvt) Ltd v Minister of Lands, Land Reform and Resettlement Another HH74-09, it seems to me that the ...
More

HH81-10 : MILRITE FARMING (PRIVATE ) LIMITED vs ENOCK PORUSINGAZI and THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and FOUR OTHERS
Ruled By: UCHENA J

The applicant is the former owner of Stilfontein of Umzila of Chipinge. Its farm was acquired by the State but it did not vacate the farm as provided by section 3(2) of the Gazetted Land (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28]. It was prosecuted, convicted and sentenced for contravening section 3(3) of the Gazetted Land ...
More

SC45-14 : LOVEMORE MAKUNUN'UNU vs FORRESTER ESTATES (PRIVATE) LIMITED and MINISTER OF LANDS & RURAL RESETTLEMENT
Ruled By: MALABA DCJ, GARWE JA and GUVAVA JA

In submissions before this Court, the first respondent has conceded that the court a quo misdirected itself in failing to address the only issue referred to it for determination. That question was whether the appellant was entitled to the occupation of Subdivision 2 of Frogmore Estate, Mvurwi, on the basis of the offer letter ...
More

HH165-10 : DAVID CHAPFIKA vs TAKADANA MAKINA and HEDON CHATAMBALALA and DEPUTY POLICE COMMISSIONER GENERAL MATANGA and ASSISTANT POLICE COMMISSIONER PFUMVUTI and THE MINISTER OF LANDS
Ruled By: BHUNU J

The first two respondents were issued with offer letters in respect of subdivision 7 and 10 of The Grove in the District of Goromonzi under the Land Reform and Resettlement Programme (Model A2, Phase 11) scheme respectively. On 25 November, the fifth respondent wrote to both respondents withdrawing both offer letters. He then offered the ...
More

HH33-11 : ALAN McGREGOR vs NEHEMIAH SABURI and ATTORNEY GENERAL and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

In this urgent chamber application, the applicant sought a provisional order in the following terms:“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT1. The provisional order is herein confirmed.2. The first respondent shall produce to this court the offer letter upon which he relies for his claim to be entitled to occupy any part of Nyamakari Farm in the Burma ...
More

HH148-11 : HUDSON JOSTINO ZHANDA and IRENE ZHANDA vs T.J GREAVES (PVT) LTD and T.J. GREAVES and THE HON. HERBERT MURERWA N.O.
Ruled By: BHUNU J

The applicants are husband and wife. The couple was issued with a joint offer letter on 29 November 2010 in respect of a certain piece of agricultural land known as the whole of Enondo in the District of Seke, Mashonaland East Province measuring approximately 763 hectares in extend. That land was previously held by ...
More

HH232-10 : ANDREW RICHARD BRUFORD vs THE ATTORNEY GENERAL and THE MINISTER OF LANDS AND RURAL RESETTLEMENT and MAGISTRATE JARABINI and OTHERS
Ruled By: CHIWESHE JP

The fourth respondent stated that he is the holder of an offer letter relating to the land in question. He is authorized to move onto the farm. So far he has moved onto the fields without hindrance. He expects the applicant to move out of the farm.
More

HB11-10 : GORDON SPENCER and GARY BROWN vs THE MINISTER OF LANDS, LAND RESETTLEMENT AND RESETTLEMENT and THE CHIEF LANDS OFFICER, BULILIMA and MS R. BHEBHE
Ruled By: KAMOCHA J

Section 3 of the Gazetted Land (Consequential Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:28] stipulates what a former owner of gazetted land is entitled to while at the same time it lays down what he or she is prohibited to do. The provisions are couched in this manner and are quoted in extenso infra. “3. Occupation of Gazetted land ...