High Court dismisses Chivayo’s bid to throw out Sonja Madzikanda’s marriage and property claims
The High Court has dismissed businessman Wicknell Chivayo’s application seeking to strike out claims by his estranged partner Sonja Madzikanda over the existence of their union and division of assets, ruling that the matter must proceed under an earlier consent order agreed to by both parties. In a judgment handed down on June 18, 2026, […] The post High Court dismisses Chivayo’s bid to throw out Sonja Madzikanda’s marriage and property claims appeared first on NewZimbabwe.com.
Black News 
The High Court has dismissed businessman Wicknell Chivayo’s application seeking to strike out claims by his estranged partner Sonja Madzikanda over the existence of their union and division of assets, ruling that the matter must proceed under an earlier consent order agreed to by both parties.
In a judgment handed down on June 18, 2026, Justice Fatima Maxwell said Chivayo’s application was an attempt to sidestep an existing court order that required the parties’ property dispute to be determined under case number HCHF 62/26.
“After considering submissions from counsels for both parties, and the history of this matter, I find that the application is a veiled attempt to get the assistance of the court to defeat an extant order by consent,” Maxwell said.
The judge noted that in April this year, the parties consented to an order before Justice Amy Tsanga regulating access to their minor children and agreeing how the broader dispute would be handled.
The consent order expressly provided that: “The question of the proprietary consequences of the termination of the parties’ union shall be adjudicated under case number HCHF 62/2026.”
Maxwell found that Chivayo’s subsequent application, filed on April 27, sought to undermine that agreement by asking the court to dismiss claims relating to the division of assets, dissolution of marriage, spousal maintenance and the declaration and dissolution of a civil partnership.
“I am of the view that the present application seeks to achieve a result that defeats the agreement reached by the parties, resulting in the order by consent issued by Honourable Tsanga J,” the judge said.
The court further criticised Chivayo for failing to address the existence of the earlier consent order in his application.
“Applicant did not address or refer to the existence of the order in HCHF 892/26. I take it as an attempt to pull wool over the court’s eyes,” Justice Maxwell said.
The judge added that parties cannot adopt contradictory legal positions, observing that “no person can be allowed to take up two positions that are inconsistent with one another.”
Chivayo had relied on Rule 31(1) of the High Court Rules, arguing that Madzikanda’s claims were frivolous and vexatious and should be dismissed. However, the court ruled that the provision was not applicable because the entire action could not be described as hopeless.
The judge noted that Chivayo was not challenging claims relating to custody and maintenance, while the parties also disagreed on whether the Marriages Act applied to their circumstances.
Madzikanda was additionally seeking constitutional relief.
“I am not persuaded that the summons can be termed totally hopeless to warrant dismissal,” the judge said.
The court concluded that Chivayo had effectively compromised his right to seek dismissal of the action when he consented to have the proprietary dispute determined under HCHF 62/26.
“For the above reasons, the application fails,” Justice Maxwell ruled before ordering that “the application be and is hereby dismissed with costs.”
The ruling marks the latest development in the high-profile legal battle between Chivayo and Madzikanda. Chivayo had argued that their customary union ended in 2024 following the payment and acceptance of a divorce token gupuro, and sought to block Madzikanda’s claims to matrimonial assets and spousal maintenance.
The dispute has also spilled into South Africa, where Madzikanda obtained anti-dissipation orders freezing assets linked to Chivayo and his companies pending determination of the Zimbabwean proceedings.
The substantive dispute over the existence of the parties’ relationship and any resulting property rights will now continue before the High Court under case number HCHF 62/26.
The main divorce case remains pending.
The post High Court dismisses Chivayo’s bid to throw out Sonja Madzikanda’s marriage and property claims appeared first on NewZimbabwe.com.
