The High Court of Zimbabwe has cancelled a gold mining title registered over communal land in Zhombe after finding that the claim was unlawfully pegged without the written consent of the occupier, in an area that had previously fallen under an Exclusive Prospecting Order held by RioZim Limited.

In a judgment delivered by Justice Evangelista Kabasa at the High Court of Zimbabwe in Bulawayo, the court cancelled a mining certificate granted to MMP Mining Syndicate after finding that statutory procedures under the Mines and Minerals Act (Zimbabwe) had not been followed.

The dispute arose after Charles Masvimbo, a village head in Masvimbo Village under Chief Gwesela in Zhombe, challenged the registration of a mining block known as Bamara 135, which had been granted to MMP Mining Syndicate in January 2025.

Masvimbo told the court that he has lived and farmed on the communal land since the 1990s. In 2023, he discovered gold deposits on the land and obtained a prospecting licence through Peace Mining Syndicate, a group formed with his brothers.

However, the registration of the claim stalled because the area fell under an Exclusive Prospecting Order held by RioZim. When the order was later lifted, Masvimbo attempted to proceed with the registration process but discovered that MMP Mining Syndicate had already applied for and obtained a mining title covering the same land.

Masvimbo argued that the registration was unlawful because his written consent as the occupier of the communal land had not been obtained, a requirement under Section 31 of the Mines and Minerals Act for prospecting or pegging on communal land measuring less than 100 hectares.

The dispute escalated in December 2025 when Abednigo Tawanda Makuvire, acting under the syndicate’s mining title, allegedly attempted to seize gold ore and mining dumps from the area. Community members and police intervened, and the matter was later brought before the High Court as an urgent application seeking the cancellation of the mining certificate.

In opposing the application, MMP Mining Syndicate argued that Masvimbo’s reliance on Section 31 of the Act was misplaced and that consent from the local rural district council had been obtained because the land formed part of a village settlement.

However, the court relied on a report prepared by the Provincial Mining Director for Midlands Province following a site inspection attended by both parties. The report confirmed that the land in dispute measured less than 100 hectares and that the mining claim had been pegged over land occupied by Masvimbo.

Justice Kabasa ruled that the law requires written consent from the occupier before prospecting or pegging can take place on communal land of that size.

“The evidence before the court establishes that the applicant is the occupier of the land in question and that the land measures less than 100 hectares,” the court found.

Justice Kabasa further noted that Masvimbo’s position as village head did not negate his rights as an occupier of a portion of the communal land.

“The registration was done in contravention of the Act,” the judge ruled, adding that non-compliance with mandatory statutory requirements renders the resulting administrative act invalid.

The court granted the declaratory order sought by Masvimbo, declared the issuance of the mining title unlawful, and directed the Provincial Mining Director to cancel certificate of registration number 35304 issued to MMP Mining Syndicate.

Although Masvimbo had sought costs on the higher attorney-client scale, the court ruled that there were no exceptional circumstances justifying such an award and ordered that costs be paid on the ordinary scale.