Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro-Chief Court Munyoro
In a landmark decision, Remmington Mujuru’s quest for justice has been granted, as the court has officially granted his application to register and recognise a foreign divorce decree issued by a United Kingdom court.
This ruling reinforces the importance of cross-border legal recognition, setting a precedent for others navigating similar paths.
High Court judge, Justice Gladys Mhuri, delivered the judgment on Wednesday last week, dismissing preliminary objections raised by his estranged wife, Mercy Muranganwa, the respondent, and affirming the High Court’s jurisdiction over the matter.
Mujuru sought the court’s endorsement of a divorce decree issued by the Family Court in Birmingham, UK.
The decree, finalised on May 14, 2014, ended the couple’s marriage, which had been formalised under the UK Marriages Act 1949 in Birmingham on February 13, 2004.
The couple’s union had begun in 1998 as an unregistered customary marriage in Zimbabwe before they relocated to the UK in 2002.
Justice Mhuri stated that the couple’s marriage had irretrievably broken down, with the parties living apart for over four years before the divorce was initiated.
The Birmingham Family Court dissolved the marriage based on mutual consent.
Muranganwa opposed Mujuru’s application, raising three preliminary objections. She argued that Mujuru lacked the legal standing to file the application, that the High Court lacked jurisdiction, and that the application failed to meet the requirements of Section 12 of the Matrimonial Causes Act [Chapter 5:13].
On the issue of legal standing, Muranganwa contended that Section 12 of the Act allows only women to make such applications.
She cited the case of “Makoni v Makoni” in support of her argument. However, Justice Mhuri dismissed this claim, stating, “Section 12 is not restricted to women.
“It provides for the recognition of decrees or orders of divorce, judicial separation, or nullity of marriage made in any country where the husband was not domiciled.”
The judge emphasised that domicile, not gender, determines legal standing in such cases.
“The applicant has alleged facts pointing to his domicile in Zimbabwe, and these facts have not been denied or controverted by the respondent.
“There is no basis upon which his legal standing can be questioned,” he said.
On the question of jurisdiction, Justice Mhuri referred to Section 171 of the Constitution, which grants the High Court original jurisdiction over all civil matters in Zimbabwe.
He found no merit in Muranganwa’s argument that the court lacked authority because the couple’s marriage was not registered in Zimbabwe.
Citing the Supreme Court case of “Rutsate v Wedzerai and Others,” he stated, “The original jurisdiction of the High Court is unlimited; that is to say, it can hear and determine any civil dispute, whatever the nature of the claim.”
Muranganwa also argued that the application was defective because it failed to prove that UK laws correspond substantially to Zimbabwean laws on matrimonial matters.
Justice Mhuri rejected this claim, stating that such proof is unnecessary when the applicant is the husband.
“The requirement for the present application is that the applicant proves his domicile. If his domicile is Zimbabwe, this court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction,” he ruled.
Having dismissed all preliminary objections, the court granted Mujuru’s application.
The judge ordered the registration of the UK divorce decree, stating, “I find no reason to withhold the registration and recognition of the divorce decree as prayed for by the applicant.”
Each party was ordered to bear its own costs. Mr V Vengai of Macheyo Law Chambers acted for Mujuru, while Mr Allen Nyamukondiwa of Ingwani, Chipetiwa Group of Lawyers argued the matter for Muranganwa.
