admin
to-be.
The magistrate, according to Justice Guvava, would then conduct an inquiry or cancel the licence where necessary.
Justice Guvava ordered Ms Karimatsenga to pay legal costs for Bishop Levee Kadenge, who was wrongly cited as the marriage officer for Saturday’s wedding.
“The application is hereby dismissed. Applicant shall pay third respondent (Bishop Kadenge) legal costs. (There is) no order as to costs for first and second respondents,” Justice Guvava said.
The judge described the citation of Bishop Kadenge by the applicant as “extremely reckless”.
Justice Guvava said every court, including the magistrates’ court, was a creature of statute and that it was legally wrong for the High Court to claim inherent jurisdiction over the lower court and entertain the urgent application.
Also see
She said that was tantamount to amending the Statute thereby usurping the powers of the legislature.
The judge found the existence of disputes of facts in the case that could not be resolved through an urgent chamber application.
Whether or not the PM paid lobola, was the biggest dispute in the matter.
The High Court also found that even if Ms Karimatsenga was customarily married to the PM, such an unregistered marriage was not legally valid.
She said the legislature only recognised the marriage for certain purposes.
Justice Guvava pointed out that the loophole was affecting thousands of women in Zimbabwe and that the legislature should do something to harmonise the marriages.
She said the majority of women in Zimbabwe were customarily married and were facing legal challenges in cases of divorce, inheritance and others.
Justice Guvava decided not to grant an order of costs against Ms Karimatsenga for suing the PM and Ms Macheka.
She said the woman was actually fighting in a case where emotions generally turn high.
Adv Mpofu said the idea of going to the magistrate with the same complaint was simply theoretical.
“In my view, the judge was abundantly clear in her reasoning. While accepting that Ms Karimatsenga has a theoretical remedy under Section 19 of the Marriages Act, she nonetheless found that her claims pertaining to the existence of a customary law union do not afford her any rights at law.
“Accordingly, Ms Karimatsenga does not in my view, have the right to proceed under Section 19 of the marriages Act given her circumstances. If she does proceed, she would have abused the magnanimous process of the court.
“Such obtuse intransigence in the face of a well-reasoned judgment would be frowned upon. Sadly we will be forced to descend upon her with as much force as we may be able to amass,” Adv Mpofu said.
Online Reporter