HARARE – The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by lawyer and former Finance Minister Tendai Biti against a High Court ruling that denied his application for condonation in a US$1 million defamation lawsuit brought against him by top executives of Augur Investments.
The High Court had previously granted a default judgment against Biti and ordered the trial to proceed. In response, Biti sought the Supreme Court’s intervention to overturn the ruling, but his appeal was rejected.
Biti had cited Augur Investments, its chief operations officer Tatiana Aleshina, and company executive Kenneth Raydon Sharpe as respondents in the case. Sharpe is suing Biti for defamation, alleging that the lawyer labelled him as one of Zimbabwe’s most corrupt individuals involved in the looting of national resources.
Augur Investments is demanding US$500,000 in damages, while Aleshina is claiming US$100,000, and Sharpe is seeking US$400,000.
Last year, High Court judge Justice Gladys Mhuri ruled that Biti’s explanation for his late filing of heads of argument was unsatisfactory.
“In casu, the judgment in question was pronounced on 1 March 2023. This application was filed in June 2023. This was a three-month delay. This delay, in my view and contrary to the applicant’s submission, is inordinate,” Justice Mhuri stated.
Biti argued that his delay was due to efforts to pursue applications he had filed in the Supreme Court. He claimed that after his second application was struck off on 7 June 2023, he was awaiting reasons from the Supreme Court for the decision.
However, Justice Mhuri dismissed this justification as inadequate.
“I find the applicant’s explanation to be totally unsatisfactory. It is trite that a default judgment is not appealable,” she ruled.
The judge further noted that as a senior legal practitioner, Biti should have known the legal procedures required in such a case.
“It is also not in dispute that the applicant is a seasoned practising legal practitioner,” Justice Mhuri said.
“He, therefore, knew that a default judgment is not appealable but chose not to seek rescission and instead approached the Supreme Court. Even before the Supreme Court, he was represented by legal practitioners of good standing who should have known better.”
The ruling solidifies the legal proceedings against Biti, with the trial now set to proceed in the High Court.
