Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro
Chief Court Reporter
THE High Court has interdicted three miners from carrying out mining operations at a disputed mining site in Mazowe District, ruling that they have no right to mine within Special Grant 10332 pending the determination of an eviction case.
Justice Joel Mambara ordered Prosper Shumba, Innocent Mtukwa and Johane Tom and all those acting through them to stop mining, processing, excavation, construction and transportation of ore within the Inyatsi mining area under Special Grant 10332.
The court also barred them from removing gold ore already extracted, machinery and equipment from the site until case HCH 5896/25 is finalised.
“The respondents have no right to mine within SG 10332 by virtue of Angee 62 certificate number 39309 or by virtue of any sale agreement between the second respondent and Gold Yields (Private) Limited. That much is clear on the papers,” ruled Justice Mambara.
The dispute arose after Minerals Identity (Private) Limited approached the High Court seeking an interdict, alleging that the respondents were mining within its special grant area despite an earlier High Court order directing the Minister of Mines and Mining Development and the Permanent Secretary to issue registration certificates for several special grants, including SG 10332.
The respondents opposed the application, arguing that the applicant had no certificate of registration and therefore had no right capable of protection.
They also relied on Angee 62, a block of 10 gold reef claims registered under certificate number 39309, saying it had been sold to Gold Yields (Private) Limited.
Justice Mambara found that the respondents’ own mining documents placed Angee 62 at Brecon Farm and not at Inyatsi where the disputed mining activities were taking place.
“The question is not whether Angee 62 exists. The question is where Angee 62 is located,” he said.
The judge held that the respondents had failed to produce any amended certificate or lawful authority relocating Angee 62 to the applicant’s special grant area.
“A mining certificate identifies a defined mining location. It is not a portable instrument to be carried from one gold-bearing area to another,” Justice Mambara said.
He also dismissed arguments that the matter should be referred to oral evidence because of disputes of fact.
“The decisive issue is the documentary. It is whether the respondents have placed before the court a mining title authorising mining within SG 10332 at Inyatsi. They have not,” he ruled.
The court dismissed a preliminary application seeking to set aside the matter’s set down and expunged the notice of opposition and opposing affidavit filed on behalf of the Provincial Mining Director for Mashonaland Central and the Minister of Mines and Mining Development after finding that no proper authority had been shown for filing the papers.
Justice Mambara said the earlier High Court order directing the Ministry to issue the special grant certificate remained binding until set aside.
“A court order must be obeyed unless and until it is discharged,” he said, adding that allowing failure to comply with the order to defeat the applicant’s claim “would permit administrative disobedience to defeat judicial authority.”
The Sheriff of Zimbabwe and the Zimbabwe Republic Police were authorised to enforce the order by stopping mining operations, preventing the removal of ore or equipment and securing the site.
The respondents were ordered to pay costs on the legal practitioner and client scale.
