The High Court of Zimbabwe has slapped Joh and Lewis Investment (Pvt) Ltd, a mining company with a US$100,000 fine and sentenced its officials, Johanne Charasa, Knowledge Mazivanhanga and Peter Murengu to suspended jail terms for continuing mining operations in defiance of a court order.
In a judgment handed down by Justice Joel Mambara ruled in favour of ASMDev Incorporated (Pvt) Ltd in its application against Joh and Lewis Investment (Pvt) Ltd and four individual respondents, finding that they had wilfully violated a prior court order barring mining activities at the Lonrho site.
The court heard that an interdict granted in August 2025 expressly prohibited the respondents from conducting mining operations at the site and authorised law enforcement to assist in maintaining order.
Despite being served with the order and unsuccessfully appealing it, the respondents allegedly continued mining activities in open defiance.
Justice Mambara found that all the elements required to prove contempt had been satisfied. These include the existence of a valid court order, the respondents’ knowledge of it, and deliberate non-compliance.
The judge stated: “Court orders are not polite requests. The Constitution entrenches the rule of law and the institutional authority of the courts.
“Section 164(3) provides in peremptory terms that an order or decision of a court ‘binds the State and all persons’ to whom it applies and “must be obeyed by them.”
The respondents had raised several preliminary objections, including claims that the applicant had “dirty hands” due to unpaid costs in a separate matter, and that key evidence, such as video footage and reports, was inadmissible.
They also argued that the matter contained factual disputes requiring a full trial.
However, the court dismissed all objections, ruling that the alleged unpaid costs did not justify barring the application, particularly where the case concerned enforcement of a valid court order.
On the evidentiary challenges, the court held that the material presented was sufficiently probative and that excluding it would undermine the interests of justice, especially in a case involving alleged ongoing illegality.
The court further rejected the argument that the dispute should be referred to trial, finding that the respondents’ denials were not credible enough to create a genuine dispute of fact.
“On disputes of fact, I accept that the respond-ents deny conducting mining activities at the Lonrho site.
“But the law is clear that not every dispute of fact compels a referral to trial; the court must assess whether the dispute is genuine and material and whether the denial is more than a bald traverse.
“Here, the respondents’ denial sits uneasily with the applicant’s detailed allegations, the existence of site-specific material placed before the court, and the context of an extant interdict directed precisely at preventing such activities,” Justice Mambara stated.
In its ruling, the court imposed a US$100,000 fine on Joh and Lewis Investment, wholly suspended on condition that the company immediately ceases all mining activities at the Lonrho site and complies with the interdict.
Charasa, Mazivanhanga, and Murengu were each sentenced to three months’ imprisonment, also wholly suspended on the same conditions.
The court also clarified enforcement procedures, stating that any arrest or further action must be carried out through lawful channels involving the Sheriff or police acting under a court-issued writ.
It directed the Officer in Charge at Concession Police Station to investigate any future allegations of non-compliance before taking enforcement action.
“The alternative is institutional paralysis and the erosion of constitutional governance,” the judge warned.
The respondents were ordered to pay costs on a legal practitioner and client scale.
