Zimasco has taken a miner to court seeking US$269 474 for alleged unauthorised chrome extraction from its mining claim in Lalapanzi.
Zimasco has taken miner Fidelis Mudzengi to court seeking US$269 474 in compensation for allegedly extracting chrome ore from its mining claim without authority. The matter is now set to proceed to a full civil trial after the High Court dismissed preliminary objections raised by the defendant.
The case was heard before High Court of Zimbabwe judge Justice Evangelista Kabasa. In her ruling, the judge said the matter should continue to trial, where evidence will be examined and the dispute fully determined.
Advertisement
According to court papers, Zimasco issued summons on December 13, 2021. The company claims the amount sought represents the value of chrome ore concentrate it says would have been realised from 27 349 tonnes of raw chrome allegedly mined by Mudzengi.
Zimasco says it owns a mining claim known as Rhodesdale 3 in Lalapanzi. The company alleges that between May and June 2021, Mudzengi unlawfully extracted chrome fines from its mining block.
The company argues that the 27 349 tonnes of raw chrome would have produced about 2 735 tonnes of chrome concentrate. Based on export values, Zimasco says this would amount to US$269 474 in potential revenue.
In his defence, Mudzengi denied the allegations and said he operates a separate mining claim known as Reef 2. He said the claim shares a boundary with Zimasco’s property.
Mudzengi told the court that he extracted material from a chrome dump after consulting a Zimasco representative who allegedly showed him the boundaries. He maintains that his mining work was carried out outside the plaintiff’s claim area.
He also argued that the dispute concerns damages and should therefore fall under the jurisdiction of the Administrative Court rather than the High Court. This formed part of the preliminary objections raised before trial.
Zimasco rejected that argument and insisted the chrome was taken from its dump. The company said the dump extends across its mining area and an adjacent independent site.
According to Zimasco, although boundaries were pointed out to Mudzengi, he later moved to a different section of the same chrome dump. The company says this resulted in unlawful extraction from its property.
In her judgment, Justice Kabasa said the High Court has broad powers to hear matters unless a law specifically removes that authority. She found that the present dispute did not justify taking the case away from the High Court.
The judge dismissed the preliminary objection with costs and directed that the matter be set down for trial. This means the case will now proceed to a full hearing where witnesses and evidence may be presented.
The upcoming trial is expected to determine whether the mining activities were lawful, whether chrome ore was taken from Zimasco’s claim and whether compensation should be paid.
The matter also highlights the importance of clearly defined mining boundaries and legal compliance in Zimbabwe’s chrome mining sector, where disputes over claims and extraction rights can lead to costly litigation.
