Godwills Zhovha v Angela Chirombo

On 20 January 2024, the appellant (Godwills Zhovha) sold to the respondent (Angela Chirombo) the right to occupy and use 5000 square meters of communal land in Nyakudya village under Chief Chinamhora for US$ 10,000. The respondent paid US$ 9,000 immediately and took occupation, erecting infrastructure to run a private school. The appellant had only built a cottage and well on the land. After the respondent made massive improvements, and before she paid the outstanding US$ 1,000, the appellant attempted to resile from the contract. The respondent sued in the Community Court presided over by Chief Chinamhora. Despite being served with summons, the appellant was in default. On 11 February 2024, the Community Court granted a default judgment in favor of the respondent, declaring the land belonged to her. The appellant appealed to the Magistrates Court at Chinamhora, which dismissed the appeal on 14 April 2025. The appellant then appealed to the High Court.

• Whether an appeal lies against a default judgment
• Whether the Magistrates Court should have entertained an appeal against a default judgment granted by the Community Court
• Whether an appeal against a judgment dismissing an appeal against a default judgment is properly before the High Court

The matter was struck off the roll with no order as to costs (as the respondent did not appear at the hearing).

A default judgment cannot be appealed against. The correct procedure to challenge a default judgment is to make an application for rescission. An appeal against a default judgment is a nullity and must be struck off the roll. An appeal against a judgment that itself dealt with an appeal against a default judgment is equally a nullity as it draws its life from a nullity.

The court did not find it necessary to determine any of the four grounds of appeal raised by the appellant before the High Court, as nothing turned on them given the procedural defect that rendered the entire appeal a nullity. The court noted that even the appellant himself, through his second ground of appeal before the Magistrates Court and through submissions by his counsel, conceded that the Community Court had granted a default judgment, which made his decision to appeal rather than seek rescission all the more inappropriate.

This case reaffirms the well-established principle in Zimbabwean law that default judgments cannot be appealed against. It demonstrates the application of this principle across all levels of the court hierarchy, from Community Courts through Magistrates Courts to the High Court. The case serves as a reminder that the proper procedure when challenging a default judgment is to apply for rescission, not to appeal. It also illustrates that proceedings built upon nullities are themselves nullities and will not be entertained by the courts. The case is instructive on civil procedure in the context of communal land disputes adjudicated through the traditional court system.