A crucial legal action filed by a tycoon over the closure of Interfin Merchant Bank (IMB) in 2012 is still haunting the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) more than a decade after the lender was shut down.
Al Shams Global BVI, a firm registered in the British Virgin Islands (BVI) and is controlled by tycoon Jayesh Shah, slapped the RBZ with a lawsuit in 2023, alleging gross negligence and breach of statutory duty.
BVI is a tax haven and Al Shams Global operates in Zimbabwe as a foreign company.
The lawsuit centres on what it alleged was the RBZ’s liability following IMB’s closure.
The case is part of a string of legal battles detailed in the RBZ’s 2025 annual report, which was released this week.
It revealed claims exceeding US$35 million, as investors, companies and former employees pursue the apex bank over multiple legacy allegations.
Keep Reading
- RBZ blocks Harare US dollar charges
- Industry cries foul over new export surrender requirements
- One stitch in time saves nine
- Banks keep NPLs in safe territory
The report said several cases remained unresolved by December 31.
“Al Shams Global BVI instituted proceedings against the Reserve Bank in the High Court of Zimbabwe in 2023, claiming damages amounting to US$19,5 million plus interest, for alleged negligence in its supervision of a collapsed banking institution, namely Interfin Merchant Bank,” the RBZ’s report said.
“The High Court ruled in favour of the Reserve Bank. However, Al Shams Global BVI appealed to the Supreme Court, which referred the matter back to the High Court for the presiding Judge to clear issues raised by the Appeal Court.
“As at 31 December 2025, the matter was yet to be placed before the presiding Judge of the High Court.”
IMB’s closure was part of the tailwinds of a brutal banking crisis which ripped through Zimbabwe from 2004, triggering the collapse of several big lenders.
The RBZ said another legal dispute involving the Al Shams group related to funds deposited into a Fidelity Gold Refinery account held at a local banking institution.
According to the annual report, Al Shams Global sued the RBZ and other parties after the central bank requested proof of the source of funds.
However, on April 22, 2026, the Commercial Court settled the case, with Justice Joseph Mafusire delivering a stinging rebuke of the central bank. The court found that the bank acted unlawfully, irrationally and in bad faith when it froze the gold-buying company’s funds. As a result, Justice Mafusire set aside the RBZ’s July 2025 decision to suspend Fidelity Gold Refinery’s account at GetBucks Microfinance Bank.
“The parties know it: this was a matter not for the courts,” he wrote. “It ought to have been settled out of court. That it did not, is manifestly an issue of personality clashes and the preservation of self-images.”
In a separate matter, Al Shams Building Materials Trading Company sought about US$16,055 million through arbitration proceedings against the central bank, alleging breach of a deed of settlement.
Al Shams argued that the agreement entitled the affected party to demand full payment of outstanding amounts in the event of a breach.
However, the RBZ said it had fulfilled all obligations under the agreement and the arbitrator ruled in favour of the central bank.
“Al Shams Building Materials Trading Company initiated arbitration proceedings against the Reserve Bank, claiming approximately US$16,055 million plus legal fees,” the report said.
“The company alleged that the Reserve Bank was in breach of a Deed of Settlement between the parties which provided that any breach would result in the affected party calling for payment of the outstanding amount in full. The Reserve Bank maintained that it had fulfilled all its obligations under the agreement and the matter was determined in the Reserve Bank’s favour.”
The annual report also disclosed smaller disputes involving seized vehicles and former workers.
Two claimants sued the RBZ and its Asset Management Unit, seeking special damages of US$23 040 per month from November 1, 2024, over fire-related damage to seized vehicles stored at the RBZ Sports Club premises.
The central bank argued that it had been wrongly cited and said investigations into suspected arson were still underway.
“The plaintiffs could not sue for damages where blame had not been apportioned,” the report said.
The matter was still pending at year-end.
By yesterday, the RBZ had not responded to a request for comment.