Tom Beattie Farms (Private) Limited a.k.a. Chigwell Estate and Thomas Irving Beattie v Ignatius Mugova and Attorney-General of Zimbabwe

REPORTABLE (3)

                                                             Judgment No. CCZ 7/17
                                                         Civil. Application No. 32/09


(1) TOM BEATTIE FARMS (PRIVATE) LIMITED a.k.a. CHIGWELL                     ESTATE
(2) THOMAS IRVING BEATTIE

                      v

(1)   IGNATIUS MUGOVA
(2)    ATTORNEY-GENERAL           OF     ZIMBABWE

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ZIMBABWE
CHIDYAUSIKU CJ, MALABA DCJ, CHEDA JA, ZIYAMBI JA & GARWE JA
HARARE, MARCH 19 & 31, 2009
JUDGMENT RELEASED ON MARCH 16, 2017

L Uriri with him T Mpofu for the applicants

P Machaya, for the respondents


CHIDYAUSIKU CJ: On 31 March 2009 this Court issued the following order in this

matter:


          "IT IS DECLARED THAT:

               (1)    The refusal to refer the constitutional issue in the magistrate's
                      court in the matter of The State v Tom Beattie (Pvt) Ltd and
                      Thomas Irving Beattie to the Supreme Court for determination
                      was wrongful and was consequently a breach of the applicants’
                      right to protection of law under section 18(1) of the
                      Constitution of Zimbabwe.

               (2)    Section 277(3), as read with section 277(5), of the Criminal
                      Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] is
                      consistent with section 18(1), as read with section 18(13)(b), of
                      the Constitution of Zimbabwe.

               (3)    Sections 3(2) and 3(3) of the Gazetted Lands (Consequential
                      Provisions) Act [Chapter 20:08] are consistent with
                      section 18(1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. Consequently
                      the prosecution of the applicants under section 277(3), as read
                      with section 277(5), of the Criminal Law (Codification and
                      Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23] and sections 3(2) and 3(3) of the
                                           2                                  CCZ 7/17


                       Gazetted    Lands       (Consequential       Provisions)     Act
                       [Chapter 20:08] is lawful.

               (4)     The Workshop held at Chegutu on 6 February 2009 and its
                       deliberations did not violate the applicants’ rights protected in
                       terms of section 18(2) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.

               (5)     There will be no order as to costs."


We indicated that the reasons for the order would follow.



               On 26 November 2010 in the matter of Commercial Farmers Union

and Nine Ors v The Minister of Lands and Rural Resettlement and Six Ors this Court

issued judgment No. SC 31/10. In that judgment this Court dealt with issues that are

identical to those that arise in the present case.    The reasons for judgment in the

Commercial Farmers Union case supra apply to the present case with equal force.

There is no need to issue a separate judgment in this case.



               MALABA DCJ:         I agree


               CHEDA JA:       (Rtrd)


               ZIYAMBI JA:       I agree


               GARWE JA:        I agree


Gollop & Blank, applicants' legal practitioners

Civil Division of the Attorney-General's Office, respondents' legal practitioners