Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro
Chief Court Reporter
THE High Court has dismissed an urgent application by Jill Matangi who wanted the court to declare that she had fully paid a debt after depositing ZiG146 000, ruling that she was bound by an earlier agreement to pay the debt in US dollars.
Justice Regis Dembure discharged a provisional order that had temporarily stopped execution against Matangi’s household property and ordered her to pay the costs of the case.
The dispute arose after Matangi borrowed money from Kudzai Tongoona and later agreed to settle the outstanding US$5 700 through monthly payments of US$300.
The parties signed a Deed of Settlement, which was later made part of a consent order issued by the Magistrates Court. The agreement was clear: Matangi would pay in US dollars.
After paying US$300, Matangi fell behind on the agreed instalments. She later made a payment of ZiG9 031.86, which Tongoona’s lawyers said was applied towards legal costs rather, than the capital debt.
On March 4 this year, with the Messenger of Court already moving to attach her property, Matangi transferred another ZiG146 000 into the bank account of Tongoona’s lawyers.
She argued that the money was equivalent to the outstanding US dollar debt and, therefore, settled everything she owed.
But Tongoona rejected the payment, insisting that the court order required payment in US dollars.
The Messenger of Court subsequently removed Matangi’s household goods, prompting her to approach the High Court on an urgent basis.
She argued that ZiG was legal tender and that Zimbabwean law allowed a local debt to be settled in its equivalent local currency.
Justice Dembure, however, found that the issue was not simply whether ZiG was legal tender.
The key question was what the parties had agreed to and what had subsequently been ordered by the Magistrates Court.
The judge said Matangi had freely agreed to pay in US dollars and could not simply change the currency of payment because ZiG was also legal tender.
“The courts do not make contracts for the parties,” Justice Dembure said, stressing that freely made agreements must be respected.
The judge said the consent order had given the parties’ agreement the force of a court order.
Once that happened, Matangi could not use a declaratory application to change the terms of the order.
Justice Dembure said: “The court order remains enforceable, and the court cannot vary that order or purport to set it aside through a declaratur.”
The court rejected Matangi’s argument that the payment of ZiG had discharged the debt.
Justice Dembure found that the agreement specifically required US dollars and that Matangi had been warned about this position months before the disputed payment.
In July 2025, Tongoona’s lawyers had written to Matangi advising her that the Deed of Settlement required payment in US dollars and that payment in ZiG would not be accepted.
Despite that warning, Matangi later deposited ZiG146 000 without first obtaining Tongoona’s agreement to accept the local currency.
The judge also rejected Matangi’s claim that Tongoona had waived her right to demand payment in US dollars by accepting the ZiG payment.
According to the judgment, Tongoona had never accepted the payment as settlement of the debt. Instead, her lawyers later offered to refund the money and again demanded payment in US dollars.
Justice Dembure said there was, therefore, no evidence of waiver.
The court also dismissed Matangi’s reliance on previous cases dealing with payment of foreign currency-denominated debts in local currency.
Those cases, the judge found, were different because they did not involve a consent order based on a settlement agreement in which the parties had expressly chosen the currency of payment.
The judge held that Matangi had paid only US$300 of the US$5 700 debt.
Her ZiG payments did not settle the capital debt because they were not made in the agreed currency.
The execution against her property was, therefore, found to be lawful.
Justice Dembure also declined to grant the punitive legal costs sought by the respondents, saying the circumstances did not justify such an order.
“The application cannot be termed an abuse of court process,” the judge said, adding that ordinary costs should follow.
The court consequently ordered that the provisional order granted on March 12, 2026 be discharged and that Matangi pay the costs of the suit.
The ruling leaves Matangi bound by the original consent order and still liable for the outstanding debt in US dollars.
