Villager loses 12 cattle in traditional court ruling

A Mazowe villager, Christopher Chisango, has won a reprieve at the High Court after successfully challenging a traditional court ruling that had ordered him to compensate a fellow villager with 12 cattle for crop damages caused by his livestock.

The ruling, delivered by Justice Amy Tsanga, set aside the earlier judgment by Chief Nemakope's court in Mazowe, which had ordered Chisango to pay either US$4 400 or 12 beasts after his cattle damaged Kuhlengisa Machona's maize crop.

According to court papers, Machona initially approached the chief's court seeking compensation for the destroyed crop, estimating his loss at US$4 400. Chisango admitted liability, leading the traditional court to issue the controversial compensation order. Some of Chisango's cattle were later sold to satisfy the ruling, leaving an outstanding balance of US$656.

Despite settling part of the compensation, Chisango lodged an appeal at the magistrate's court, arguing that the chief's court had misdirected itself by failing to conduct a proper assessment of the crop damage through an official from the Department of Agricultural Research and Extension Services (Arex) before making its determination.

Furthermore, Chisango challenged the ruling on the basis that the judgment had been handed down in United States dollars, in violation of Statutory Instrument 142 of 2019 and SI 85 of 2020, which at the time prohibited the use of foreign currency for local transactions in favour of the Zimbabwe dollar.

Machona, however, contested Chisango's appeal through a review application, arguing that Chisango had forfeited his right to appeal after paying part of the debt. Machona also alleged procedural irregularities in how the magistrate handled the appeal, claiming Chisango paid under duress and had even filed a police report over the seizure of his cattle.

The magistrate ruled against Chisango, prompting him to escalate the matter to the High Court.

In her judgment, Justice Tsanga ruled in favour of Chisango, noting that the magistrate had acted within the law in re-hearing the matter afresh, as required under Section 24 of the Customary Law and Local Courts Act [Chapter 7:05]. The judge emphasised that the magistrate was not bound by the chief's ruling and had correctly scrutinised the evidence presented.

"The quantification of damages was not done scientifically by an expert," Justice Tsanga noted. "The applicant's own witness, a field inspector, admitted she could not quantify the loss and said such assessments were supposed to be done by Arex officials."

Justice Tsanga ruled that because there was no proven liability or quantified damages upon re-hearing the case, the magistrate was correct to overturn the traditional court's decision.

"The relief sought was for the judgment of the lower court to be set aside, which meant there was no liability against Chisango," the judge said. "On the issue of the ruling being in US dollars, there was no need for the magistrate to delve into that since no damages were proved."

Dismissing Machona's review application with costs, Justice Tsanga ruled there had been no procedural irregularities and that the magistrate had exercised proper legal reasoning in reaching the decision.

The judgment brings relief to Chisango, who had been left aggrieved by the chief's initial ruling and the subsequent sale of his livestock.