Elias Hwenga and Mercy Hwenga v FBC Bank Limited and The Sheriff of Zimbabwe

The applicants filed an urgent chamber application seeking to stay/suspend the execution sale of their dwelling at Stand 309 The Grange Township subject to fulfilment of alternative settlement offers. The applicants filed papers as self-actors but Advocate Chinwawadzimba appeared claiming to be briefed by Govere Law Chambers. During proceedings, the advocate conceded the application was fatally defective in form (wrong procedure under rule 244 instead of rule 348A(5b), lack of clarity, meaningless draft order, etc.) and offered to withdraw. The court ordered the advocate to regularize her authority to appear and file proper assumption of agency. Subsequently, notices of withdrawal, assumption of agency, and renunciation purportedly from Govere Law Chambers were filed. However, when the court verified with Govere Law Chambers, they categorically disowned all documents and denied ever instructing Advocate Chinwawadzimba or acting for the applicants. The advocate had filed forged documents with the court.

• Whether the urgent chamber application was properly constituted
• Whether there was proper legal representation for the applicants
• Whether the advocate had authority to appear on behalf of the applicants
• What consequences should follow from the filing of forged court documents
• What sanctions should be imposed on an advocate who misleads the court and files forged documents

1. The application was dismissed with costs. 2. Advocate Chinwawadzimba was ordered to pay the first respondent's costs on a legal practitioner-client scale de bonis propriis (from her own funds).

An advocate who appears before the court without proper authority, files forged court documents purportedly from a law firm that has disowned them, and persistently misleads the court engages in dishonourable, unworthy and contemptuous conduct that warrants dismissal of the application and a personal costs order against the advocate on a legal practitioner-client scale de bonis propriis. The court has the power and duty to verify the authenticity of court process when irregularities are suspected, and to impose sanctions on legal practitioners who abuse court processes.

The court observed that Advocate Chinwawadzimba's conduct called for censure not only by the High Court but also by the Law Society of Zimbabwe, suggesting that professional disciplinary proceedings would be appropriate. The court also noted that advocates in practice appear only in terms of a brief from a law firm, emphasizing the proper structure of legal representation. The court commented that the persistence in filing forged documents was "outright contemptuous," indicating that contempt of court proceedings could potentially have been instituted. The observation that the forged documents bore signatures with "queer loops" and lacked usual lawyers' references demonstrates the court's attention to detail in detecting fraudulent filings.

This case is significant in Zimbabwean jurisprudence for establishing serious consequences for advocates who mislead the court and file forged documents. It reinforces the duty of candor to the court and the importance of proper professional conduct. The case demonstrates the court's willingness to impose personal costs orders (de bonis propriis) against legal practitioners who engage in dishonourable conduct, even where their clients may have had a legitimate underlying dispute. It also highlights the court's duty to verify suspicious filings and take active steps to protect the integrity of judicial proceedings. The case serves as a warning about the severe consequences of fabricating legal documents and falsely claiming authority to represent parties, conduct which the court characterized as contemptuous and warranting referral to the Law Society.