THE High Court in Harare has struck off the roll a case in which a businessman was suing the Parks and Wildlife Management Authority for damages totalling US$193 784 for confiscating his fishing rigs.
The businessman, Taurai Marava had cited the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (ZimParks) as the defendant to recover his fishing rigs and costs. However, the citation of ZimParks proved costly for Marava after the court struck the matter of the roll with costs.
High Court Judge Justice Christopher Dube-Banda said ZimParks was wrongly cited since the “name does not appear in the Act establishing the defendant”.
"This matter turns on whether there is a legal entity answering to the name Zimparks. There is no such legal entity. There is, however, a legal person called Parks and Wildlife Management Authority,” Dube-Banda ruled.
"The inclusion of the word "Zimbabwe" altered the legal identity of the defendant.
"Therefore, the defendant cannot lawfully be sued in any other name except the name its corporate name decreed in section 3 of the Act.”
The Judge added: “At law there is no legal entity answering to the name ‘Zimbabwe Parks and WildLife Management Authority. The plaintiff, therefore, sued a non-existent defendant. The summon is a nullity.”
According to the court papers, Marava issued summons against Parks Authority on March 7, 2019 seeking compensation in the sum of US$193 784 as damages for loss of income caused by the confiscation of his fishing rigs.
- Fresh land invasions hit Whitecliff
- Pomona cash row escalates
- Border Timbers targets European markets
- SA name strong A side for Zim tour
Keep Reading
However, the defendant then filed a special plea charging that there is no legal entity known as ZimParks. The defendant also submitted that Marava never had a fishing permit.
The defendant also submitted that even if Marava had a fishing permit, it would have been automatically cancelled after it was discovered that he was fishing in prohibited waters.
Marava, however, insisted that the defendant had been correctly cited citing previous correspondence after his fishing rigs were impounded.
His lawyers submitted that Marava previously sued the defendant for the release of the two fishing rigs.
