ARISTON Holdings Limited, a Zimbabwe Stock Exchange-listed agro-industrial giant known for producing tea, macadamia nuts, horticultural crops and poultry, has won a major legal battle after the High Court struck down mining claims on its Kent Estate.
In a judgment delivered in Chinhoyi, Justice Philda Muzofa declared two mining certificates granted to Kundai Mining Syndicate invalid and ordered their immediate cancellation.
The respondents in the matter were the mining commissioner for Mashonaland West province, the secretary for Mines and Mining Development, the minister, the Environmental Management Agency and Kundai Mining Syndicate.
The dispute centred on mining activities within Ariston’s Kent Estate in Norton, with the company arguing that the syndicate’s claims were unlawfully issued and posed a threat to its farming operations.
Justice Muzofa ruled that the mining certificates were granted before the syndicate had obtained an environmental impact assessment certificate, a mandatory legal requirement.
“An environmental impact assessment certificate is a prerequisite to the registration of a mining claim,” the judge said.
Keep Reading
- Inaugural Zim investor indaba highlights
- Stop clinging to decaying state firms
- ZB explores options to tackle inflation
- Zim operations drive FMB Capital
She said any certificate issued without it was invalid from the start: “A nullity remains a nullity. Courts cannot sanitise that which was issued against the law.”
The mining syndicate argued that it later obtained the environmental certificate, effectively correcting the error.
But the court rejected this, saying the defect cannot be fixed after the fact.
“There was nothing in the first place to regularise,” Justice Muzofa said.
The judge also dismissed arguments by government authorities tasked with administering mining laws, who had urged the court to adopt a more flexible interpretation.
“The doctrine of stare decisis [to stand by things decided] precludes this court from interpreting the two sections differently. Lower courts are bound by decisions of superior courts,” she ruled.
In a sharp rebuke, the court warned authorities against siding with litigants.
“It is undesirable for the administrative authority to take sides with litigants... It must not pitch camp with any one of the litigants,” Justice Muzofa said.
The court found that Ariston as the lawful holder of the land, had a clear legal interest to protect.
“Undoubtedly, the fifth respondent’s occupation will interfere with the applicant’s right,” the judge noted.
A ground survey had earlier confirmed that one of the claims breached legal distance requirements from farming operations, leading to a concession by the miner.
However, the court said both claims were fatally flawed due to the absence of prior environmental approval.
The ruling reinforces Zimbabwean case law that environmental clearance should come before mining rights are granted, with the court stressing that the Environmental Management Act takes precedence over mining laws where there is conflict.
“All the legal instruments regulating mining activities must be read together... The Environmental Management Act takes precedence,” the judgment stated.
The court ordered the mining commissioner to cancel the certificates and directed both the commissioner and the mining syndicate to pay legal costs on a higher scale.