Rusape businesswoman appeals protection order granted to adulterous Zanu PF official

RUSAPE businesswoman Loveness Nyamundanda has approached the High Court appealing against the protection order granted to her ex-lover and politician Albert Nyakuedzwa. 

Rusape magistrate Ms Patience Madondo granted the contested order on 7 October 2013.

Nyakuedzwa had approached the court for protection, accusing the businesswoman of harassing and threatening him and his wife Happy Faith Nyakuedzwa, who has since lodged a $100 000 adultery damage lawsuit against her.

The court also heard that on 4 September 2013, around 11pm, she had also pounced, ransacked and seized some property from House Number 765, Castle Base, Rusape.

Rusape-based lawyer Mr Maxwell Chiwanza, of Chiwanza and Partners Legal Practitioners, represented Nyakuedzwa in the matter.

In a notice of appeal, drafted by Nyamundanda’s Kwekwe-based lawyers Mkushi, Foroma and Maupa Legal Practitioners, which The Manica Post has a copy, Nyamundanda’s grounds of appeal are as follows:

“The court a quo erred and seriously misdirected itself in ruling that it had jurisdiction to hear the matter having regard to the nature of the dispute.

“The court a quo erred and misdirected itself in the ruling that there was justification for proceeding ex parte in the respect of the matter.

“The court a quo erred and seriously misdirected itself in dismissing appellant’s preliminary point that the averments of the respondent do not prima facie disclose any factual or legal grounds which can justify the final protection order.

“The order granted by the court was also partly based on serious misconception by the court over the full nature (of the dispute).

“It is therefore submitted that there were no facts upon which the court could have granted the final protection order in the favour of the respondent and the court should have discharged or dismissed the interim protection order.

“Wherefore, the appellant pray that the appeal be allowed and that the order of the court be quashed and set aside.”

In a ruling, which irked the applicant, Ms Madondo concurred with Mr Chiwanza’s argument that the two “had shared intimacy, though the relationship was an adulterous one” and the manner in which the businesswoman pounced, ransacked and seized property from House Number 765, Castle Base, Rusape, in the dead of the night, was proof enough of bad blood between the two ex-adulterous lovebirds.

Mrs Madondo further agreed with Mr Chiwanza that under the circumstance, it was in the interest of justice to protect Nyakuedzwa’s wife and children from harassment by the businesswoman.

It was the court’s verdict that Nyamundanda “breached” her ex-boyfriend’s peace when she visited his house and seized some property in the presence of his wedded wife.

Such conduct, ruled the court, was provocative and could lead to an altercation and the courts were there to prevent such from happening. Nyakuedzwa made the application for a protection order against the businesswoman in terms of the Section 9 of the Domestic Violence Act (Chapter 5: 16).

The effect of the issuance of such an order by the court was that it legally barred Nyamundanda from threatening the complainant and setting her foot at House Number 765, Castle Base, Rusape, which used to be their love nest. Manica Post