Judgment No. SC 22/18 Civil Appeal No. SC 291/16 [39] A party who has possession of agricultural land must show that he/she has lawful authority for such possession. In CFU and Ors vs the Minister of Lands and Rural Resettlement & Ors, supra, this Court made it clear that for one to have lawful authority, one must be in a possession of an offer letter, permit or land settlement lease. [40] The law is now established that an interim interdict will not be granted to a person whose rights in a thing have already been taken by operation of law at the time he or she makes an application for interim relief - Airfield Investments (Pvt) Ltd vs Min of Lands, Agriculture and Rural Resettlement & Others 2004 (supra). Indeed once a farm has been acquired, the rights over such farm vest in the State. That being the position the former owner and title holder has no locus standi to approach the court for an interdict because he or she cannot establish a clear right – Cedor Park Farm (Pvt) Ltd v Minister of State for National Security and Ors 2010 (2) ZLR 158 (H), 164 B-C. [41] Having regard to the above authorities, the appellant was therefore not in a position to establish a clear right. In the circumstances interdictory relief – even on an interim basis – could not and should not have been granted. SPOLIATION PLEADED FOR THE FIST TIME IN ANSWERING PAPERS [42] It is clear that the issue of spoliation only surfaced for the first time in the answering affidavit and heads of argument filed on behalf of the appellant. In that affidavit the appellant conceded that the farm had been lawfully acquired by the State. [43] In its heads of argument before this Court, the appellant exerted much energy on the issue of spoliation. It argued that its petition “was merely for confirmation of an order 16