DISTRIBUTED BY VERITAS TRUST Tel: [263] [4] 794478 Fax & Messages [263] [4] 793592 E-mail: veritas@mango.zw Veritas makes every effort to ensure the provision of reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied. Judgment No. SC 41 /18 Civil Appeal No. SC 326/14 parties had conducted their business on the farm since 2002. The respondent had initially been allocated the farm through an offer letter and together with the appellant they proved to the acquiring authority that they are serious farmers after which the respondent was given a 99year lease. The lease was registered with the registrar of deeds in terms of s 65(1) of the Deeds Registries Act [Chapter 20:05]. It was registered in favour of the respondent through a Notarial Deed of Lease dated 15 May 2007. The lease was registered during the subsistence of the marriage. During that period the parties were jointly conducting their farming businesses on the farm. Upon separation they separately embarked on individual farming activities on the same farm. The appellant raised chickens and pigs on one portion of the farm while the respondent concentrated on crop production on the other portion. On signing the consent paper, they agreed that the appellant would remain in occupation of a portion of the farm she was using for a period of 9 months. At the trial the issues before the court a quo were: 1. Whether the appellant was entitled to any rights in the farm and 2. What constitutes a fair and equitable distribution of those rights. The parties led evidence to substantiate their positions. The respondent wanting all rights in the lease to be awarded to him led evidence to the effect that rights to the farm were allocated to him through the lease agreement. It was argued on behalf of the respondent that the farm does not form part of the assets of the parties capable of distribution in terms of 3

Select target paragraph3