High Court strikes mining dispute off roll over ore‑ownership conflict

The Bulawayo High Court has struck off the roll an urgent mining dispute between Posse Solutions (Pvt) Ltd and Ponk Mining (Pvt) Ltd, ruling that the matter could not be resolved on the papers due to serious and unresolved disputes of fact.

The case arose from allegations by Posse Solutions — holder of Special Grant No. 9929 at Howard Farm in Matopo — that it was unlawfully dispossessed of approximately 600 tonnes of gold ore by Ponk Mining and its employees during an incident in early March 2026.

According to court papers, Posse Solutions claimed the ore, valued at about US$284 400, was forcibly removed from its mining site and transported to the respondent’s operations without consent. The company approached the High Court on an urgent basis seeking a spoliation order for restoration of possession.

Ponk Mining, however, strongly denied the allegations, insisting it operates legally within its own mining claim, Dawn Star 5 Mine, and that only 42 tonnes of ore were moved — all of which, it argued, originated from its own site and not from the applicant’s premises.

The respondent also challenged the application on several procedural and factual grounds, including alleged defects in court forms, hearsay evidence in the founding affidavit and major inconsistencies in the applicant’s version of events.

Delivering judgment, Justice Nduna ruled that although minor procedural errors — including a reference to a non‑existent form — did not invalidate the application, the central dispute over the quantity and origin of the ore could not be resolved without oral evidence.

The court noted that the parties had presented “irreconcilable versions” regarding whether 600 tonnes or 42 tonnes of ore were removed, and from which mining site the material originated.

Citing established legal principles on disputes of fact, the judge held that motion proceedings are unsuitable where material facts are seriously contested and cannot be determined on affidavit evidence alone.

“The determination of the true quantity of ore removed and its origin requires viva voce evidence,” Justice Nduna ruled.

The court relied on precedents including Supa Plant Investments (Pvt) Ltd v Chidavaenzi and Wightman v Headfour, which emphasise that genuine disputes of fact arise where courts cannot safely choose between conflicting versions.

As a result, the High Court struck the matter off the roll, with costs awarded to the respondent, bringing an end — for now — to the urgent spoliation application.

The dispute highlights growing tensions in Zimbabwe’s mining sector, where overlapping claims, boundary conflicts and competition over high‑value mineral deposits continue to fuel litigation. Legal practitioners say the case underscores the importance of documentary evidence — particularly production records and weighbridge data — in resolving high‑value mining disputes.