Online Reporter
Ivan Zhakata
Herald Correspondent
THE Law Society of Zimbabwe (LSZ) has found prominent lawyer Mr Mark Warhurst guilty of unprofessional conduct following complaints from Mr Shepherd Chimutanda and Samalyn Investments (Pvt) Ltd, accusing him of deliberately misleading the High Court by excluding critical documents to secure a default judgment.
In two letters issued by the Law Society’s executive secretary Mr Edward Mapara dated May 22, 2025 the Council revealed that at its meeting on April 28, 2025, it considered the complaints against Mr Warhurst — formerly of the law firm Matizanadzo and Warhurst—and determined that his conduct had been deliberate, unethical and in violation of the Legal Practitioners (Code of Conduct) By-Laws.
The first complaint, filed by Mr Chimutanda, stemmed from a high-value property dispute involving No. 15 St Michaels Lane in Borrowdale.
As the duly appointed executor of the estate of the late June Searson, Chimutanda sold the property to Sayles Corporation (Pvt) Ltd.
However, when Couch Grass (Pvt) Ltd challenged the sale in case HC7953/19, Chimutanda filed and served a Notice of Opposition to Matizanadzo and Warhurst.
Despite acknowledging receipt, the firm proceeded to place the matter on the unopposed roll just days later, deliberately omitting the opposing papers from the court record.
According to Chimutanda’s complaint, Mr Richard Dhaka acting on behalf of the firm appeared before then Justice Edith Mushore on October 23, 2019 and falsely represented that there was no opposition, resulting in a default judgment.
Mr Chimutanda was subsequently removed as executor, and the sale was nullified.
“There is no doubt that the legal practitioners deliberately placed the matter on the unopposed roll for the purpose of defeating justice and defrauding an unsuspecting litigant,” Mr Chimutanda said.
The Law Society’s letter echoed the sentiment and said that Mr Warhurst had a duty to ensure all relevant notices were in the firm’s file.
“Council noted that, had the Notice of Opposition been properly retained, anyone handling the case would have been aware that the matter had been opposed and would have advised the court of the same,” Mr Mapara said.
“Your actions were deliberate.”
A second complaint, filed by Samalyn Investments (Pvt) Ltd and represented by Agrippa Madziwa, involved a nearly identical scenario, where Mr Warhurst again failed to include a Notice of Opposition in court records and proceeded to obtain a default judgment.
In both matters, junior lawyers Kerry Stone and Richard Dhaka admitted they had acted under Mr Warhurst’s direct instructions.
In both cases, Mr Warhurst claimed that no prejudice had been suffered by the complainants—a defence flatly rejected by the Law Society.
“It was clear that the complainant was denied the opportunity to be heard . . . You should not have set the matter down as you did, fully aware that you had been served.”
The Council further condemned Mr Warhurst’s failure to correct the error once it came to light and said that he should have advised the complainant or filed a Notice of Abandonment of Judgment, which he failed to do.
The Society found Mr Warhurst guilty of conduct likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession and resolved that the related complaints be consolidated for the purposes of sentencing.
Mr Warhurst has been given 14 days to file submissions in mitigation.
If he fails to do so, the Council has warned it will proceed to determine an appropriate sentence without further reference to him.
The ruling has sent shockwaves through the legal fraternity, casting a spotlight on internal ethical standards and reinforcing that no lawyer—regardless of seniority—is above accountability.
Once the LSZ determine the sentence, they will have to send it to the High Court so that the penalty will have a legal force or effect.
This is a real criminal – even a Rolls car in his name has disappeared to Ireland.