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 36/18 Civil Appeal No. SC 279/16 “I Ngonidzashe Gumbo NR 63-361813-K03 of No. 6 Denham Close Highlands, Harare have surrendered (1) Isuzu KB 300 D-TECH REG NO ABE 9841, black in colour mileage 98444and (2) Mercedes Benz ML 350, metallic blue Reg No ABE 9989 mileage 79060 which were issued to me as the CEO of Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission as part of my conditions of service, on the instruction of the Officer Commanding CID Homicide Harare.” In his founding affidavit the appellant averred that “the respondent with the assistance of heavily armed police officers had come to his house and demanded that he surrender the keys to the motor vehicles.” He said the demand was vocal and no written letter demanding the return of the vehicles was availed to him. According to the appellant, the police had indicated that they did not require a court order or a letter as they were acting on the specific instructions of the respondent. Appellant said that given the attitude of the police, as a compromise he requested the police to write a document confirming that they had taken the vehicles as there was no court order authorizing the same. It is suggested by the appellant that this was the background to the origins and execution of the indemnity that he wrote and attached to his affidavit. The principle behind spoliation is that no man should be permitted to resort to selfhelp as to do so would strike at the heart of the principle that the rule of law should be adhered to at all times. Consequently, if a person without being authorized by a court order dispossesses another person, the court without enquiring into the merits of the dispute will summarily grant an order for the restoration of possession to the applicant as soon as he has proved that he was in peaceful and undisturbed possession and that he was despoiled of possession by the respondent. An applicant to an order for mandament van spolie has an onus to prove on a balance of probabilities that he was unlawfully deprived of the property which is the subject of the dispute. 5