Zimbabwe High Court: Halts Borrowdale Housing Project HCH 2294/26

• The Zimbabwe High Court issued an interim interdict, halting a 23-unit housing project in Borrowdale, Harare.
• Justice Nevile Wamambo ruled that continued construction risked making a pending legal challenge against the development permit meaningless.
• The court found the development permit was not automatically transferred with the property deed and questioned the respondent's inconsistent claims of non-involvement.
• Applicants, Glenbeach Investments and Leigh Ann Patricia Rudland, challenged the permit on grounds of jurisdictional issues and lack of environmental clearance.
• The ruling emphasizes that parties in a dispute must maintain their positions and cannot advance their projects while legal challenges are ongoing.

A court whose reserved judgment can be outrun by a cement mixer has ceased to regulate anything.

The Zimbabwe High Court has issued an interim interdict, effectively halting the construction of 23 double-storey cluster houses in Borrowdale, Harare. Justice Nevile Wamambo presided over the case, barring Jane Faith Makoni, along with her successors, agents, and employees, from undertaking any further construction activities at the property located at No. 8 Hedsor Drive. This injunction will remain in effect pending the final resolution of a review application that challenges the validity of the development permit issued in Makoni's name.

The court's decision was prompted by concerns that continued building at the site, despite an ongoing legal dispute, would render the judicial proceedings meaningless. Reports indicated that construction had repeatedly resumed, with work reportedly proceeding around the clock, including night shifts under floodlights. The court found that allowing the development to be completed before the legal challenge could be decided would leave the applicants with a hollow legal victory, emphasizing the judiciary's role in preserving the integrity of its processes.

The legal challenge, filed under case number HCH 2294/26, was brought by Glenbeach Investments (Private) Limited and Leigh Ann Patricia Rudland. They argued that the City of Harare's Works and Town Planning Committee lacked the necessary jurisdiction to grant the development permit for the Borrowdale housing project. Furthermore, the applicants contended that the construction proceeded without the required environmental clearance certificate Zimbabwe mandates for such undertakings. The applicants had initially sought court permission in July 2025 to bring this review application and were subsequently granted condonation and an extension of time to pursue their challenge.

Jane Faith Makoni, the respondent, opposed the interim interdict construction project, asserting that she had sold the property to Kudwis Investments (Private) Limited on September 24, 2024, and was no longer involved, residing in the United Kingdom. She also challenged the urgency of the application and claimed the applicants had failed to establish the necessary requirements for an interim interdict. However, Justice Wamambo rejected Makoni's arguments, clarifying that a development permit is not a bearer instrument that automatically transfers with property title deeds. He highlighted that the permit, not the land, was the 'fount of the construction and the subject of the pending challenge' in the Borrowdale development permit dispute. The court also noted Makoni's inconsistent position, as she attached an environmental impact assessment certificate, dated October 30, 2024, issued to Kingswood Agro (Private) Limited, to her opposing papers without explaining her possession of it or Kingswood Agro's relationship to the project.

The Zimbabwe High Court Borrowdale housing interdict HCH 2294/26 delivers a strong message regarding the judiciary's commitment to maintaining the status quo during pending litigation. Justice Nevile Wamambo's ruling underscored that allowing construction to outpace legal challenges would effectively undermine the court's authority, stating, "A court whose reserved judgment can be outrun by a cement mixer has ceased to regulate anything." This principle reinforces the expectation that parties involved in a dispute must hold their positions and cannot improve their circumstances through continued construction or demolition while legal questions remain unresolved.

This Justice Nevile Wamambo ruling also provides critical clarity on the nature of development permits, emphasizing that they are not automatically transferred with property deeds. The court's scrutiny of Makoni's contradictory claims—denying involvement while simultaneously defending the project's legality and seeking dismissal—serves as a cautionary precedent. Justice Wamambo noted that "Our law does not permit a litigant to approbate and reprobate, to blow hot and cold from the same set of lungs," reinforcing the necessity for litigants to maintain consistent and transparent positions before the court.

Lawyers and compliance officers should note the High Court's strong stance on preserving the status quo in pending review applications, particularly regarding development permits and environmental compliance. This ruling underscores the critical importance of ensuring all necessary permits and environmental certificates are validly obtained and undisputed *before* commencing construction, as courts will readily grant interdicts to prevent projects from outrunning legal challenges and rendering proceedings meaningless. It also highlights that development permits are not automatically transferred with property title deeds and that inconsistent litigant positions will be scrutinized.

Source: Reporting based on court documents and legal analysis.