Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro-Chief Court Reporter
THE High Court has found Rusape Town Council Town Secretary Solomon Gabaza and Housing Director Munetsi Chitongo in contempt of court for failing to allocate a residential stand to former council employee Stephen Razo, despite an arbitral award registered as a court order nearly seven years ago.
Justice Neville Wamambo ruled that the two officials had deliberately failed to comply with a court order and sentenced them to six months’ imprisonment, wholly suspended on condition that they immediately allocate Razo a stand of the same size as the one he previously held in Vengere Township, Rusape.
“The first (Gabaza) and second (Chitongo) respondents are responsible for the allocation of residential stands.
“They stand in a position, practically and at law, to accede to or refuse to adhere to the court order. In this case, they refused to do so and are in contempt of a court order,” ruled Justice Wamambo.
The dispute stems from an arbitral award granted to Razo on September 22, 2017, following the termination of his employment by Rusape Town Council.
The arbitrator ordered the council to pay him US$35 564.65 and provide him with a residential stand equivalent in size to Stand Number NE 3061 in Vengere Township.
The award was later registered as an order of the High Court under case number HCH 6011/19.
While the council eventually paid the monetary component, it failed to allocate the stand.
Razo returned to court seeking an order declaring the council officials in contempt for refusing to comply with the award.
Gabaza, Chitongo and the council opposed the application, arguing that the stand did not form part of the registered court order, that Razo had abandoned his claim to the property and that the order had become unenforceable due to the passage of time.
Justice Wamambo dismissed all the preliminary objections.
On the claim that Razo had abandoned his entitlement to the stand, the court examined a January 2025 letter from his lawyers acknowledging receipt of the monetary payment and halting execution proceedings.
The judge found that the letter dealt only with the payment of the money.
“I find nothing, by conduct or otherwise, reflecting that the applicant had abandoned the claim for the stand,” he said.
The court also rejected the argument that the order had become superannuated, holding that related litigation over enforcement had kept the matter alive. The issue for determination was whether the registered arbitral award included the stand allocation, despite the registration order specifically referring only to payment of money. Justice Wamambo held that registration of the arbitral award incorporated the entire award.
“The order, however, clearly and explicitly confirms the arbitration award,” he said.
“The arbitral award in this case is extant and was never set aside.”
The judge added that the High Court had no authority to select only certain portions of an arbitral award for enforcement.
“I say so because the court has no power to cherry-pick clauses of the arbitral award.”
The court found that the respondents were aware of both the arbitral award and its registration as a court order but continued to resist compliance.
“I am satisfied, in the circumstances of this case, that the respondents knew of the arbitrator’s award and the registration of the arbitral award as an order of court. The respondents actively resisted adhering to the portion of the award relating to the granting of a residential stand,” the judge said.
Justice Wamambo ordered that Gabaza and Chitongo be committed to Chikurubi Maximum Security Prison for six months, with the sentence suspended on condition that they immediately comply with the order by allocating Razo a stand equivalent to the one he previously occupied.
The court also ordered the respondents to pay costs on the legal practitioner and client scale.
