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 the Matrimonial Causes Act [Chapter 5:13]. On the other hand, the appellant wanted the lease or a portion of the farm where she was conducting her farming activities to be awarded to her. She viewed the farm as part of their matrimonial property. After hearing the parties’ evidence the court a quo found for the respondent. It found that the farm does not belong to the parties but to the government which leased it to the respondent. The court found that because of the 99-year lease, the parties have personal rights to the farm and as such the farm does not form part of the matrimonial assets of the parties which is capable of distribution on divorce. Aggrieved by the decision of the court a quo the appellant appealed to this Court. Although the appeal was premised on several grounds, it raises two issues: 1. Whether in terms of the Matrimonial Causes Act, the parties’ rights in the leased farm can be distributed on divorce. 2. If they can be distributed what would be a fair and equitable distribution of those rights. Mrs Mtetwa for the appellant submitted that the court a quo erred by failing to make a distinction between the farm and the spouses’ rights in the leased farm being an asset of the spouses. She submitted that the spouses’ rights in the 99-year lease are an asset of the spouses. I agree. 4