Jokonya v Pavarivega (HC 188 of 2011; HH 52 of 2017) [2017] ZWHHC 52 (2 February 2017)

Jokonya v Pavarivega (HC 188 of 2011; HH 52 of 2017) [2017] ZWHHC 52 (2 February 2017)

The parties were in a tacit universal partnership, and all properties acquired during the partnership, regardless of whose name they were registered in, are subject to equitable distribution. The plaintiff contributed through labour and management of businesses, entitling her to a fair share of the assets.

Citation
[2017] ZWHHC 52
Parties
Plaintiff: Violet Jokonya; Defendant: Thomas Pavarivega
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
2 February 2017
Case Number
HC 188 of 2011 ; HH 52 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Family Law Dissolution and Property Division / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Properties distributed between the parties; each party to bear own costs.
Legal Topics
Tacit Universal Partnership, Distribution of Property, Customary Law Unions
Source Language
English
Family Law Property Law Tacit Universal Partnership Distribution of Property Customary Law Unions

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Violet Jokonya

Plaintiff

Thomas Pavarivega

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Family Law Dissolution and Property Division / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parties were in a tacit universal partnership
  2. 2 Which properties are subject to distribution between the parties
  3. 3 How the movable and immovable properties should be distributed

Ratio Decidendi

The parties were in a tacit universal partnership, and all properties acquired during the partnership, regardless of whose name they were registered in, are subject to equitable distribution. The plaintiff contributed through labour and management of businesses, entitling her to a fair share of the assets.

Court Disposition

Properties distributed between the parties; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • Plaintiff awarded all household goods in house number 1955 Gaza ‘O’ Chipinge and one cow.
  • Defendant awarded all livestock at Plot 37 except one cow and all motor vehicles (2 Kombi Hiace and lorry).