Jonga v Chabata (HC 78 of 2017; HH 177 of 2017) [2017] ZWHHC 177 (14 March 2017)

Jonga v Chabata (HC 78 of 2017; HH 177 of 2017) [2017] ZWHHC 177 (14 March 2017)

The applicant is entitled to an interdict because the noting of an appeal suspends the operation of the order appealed against, the applicant has a prima facie right to the crop, injury has occurred, there is no adequate alternative remedy, and the balance of convenience favours the applicant. Non-joinder of the Minister is not fatal as the dispute is between the parties before the court.

Citation
[2017] ZWHHC 177
Parties
Applicant: Gilbert Jonga; Respondent: Nyasha Chabata
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
14 March 2017
Case Number
HC 78 of 2017 ; HH 177 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Urgent Chamber Application / Ruling on Application for Interdict
Outcome
Final interdict granted in favour of the applicant.
Legal Topics
Interdicts, Possession of State Land, Appeals, Urgency, Joinder of Parties
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Interdicts Possession of State Land Appeals Urgency Joinder of Parties

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gilbert Jonga

Applicant

Nyasha Chabata

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Chamber Application / Ruling on Application for Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to an interdict restraining the respondent from interfering with farming operations pending appeal
  2. 2 Whether the noting of an appeal suspends the operation of the order appealed against
  3. 3 Whether non-joinder of the Minister of Lands is fatal to the application

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant is entitled to an interdict because the noting of an appeal suspends the operation of the order appealed against, the applicant has a prima facie right to the crop, injury has occurred, there is no adequate alternative remedy, and the balance of convenience favours the applicant. Non-joinder of the Minister is not fatal as the dispute is between the parties before the court.

Court Disposition

Final interdict granted in favour of the applicant.

Orders

  • Pending the determination of the appeal in case number SC 771/16, the respondent is interdicted from interfering with the applicant’s farming operations at subdivision 3 of Farm 45, Glendale, Mashonaland Central.
  • No order as to costs.