"Side chick" property attached to compensate wife

Zim Now Writer

Masvingo Provincial Medical Director Amadeus Shamu’s ‘mistress’, Ancercaria Taderera’s property is being auctioned to settle US$13 000 adultery damages awarded to the estranged wife Tatyana who successfully sued Taderera for damages.

Tatyana was in February granted US$13 000 in damages by High Court judge Justice Sunsley Zisengwe although she had initially sued Taderera for US$50 000.

The damages are US$5 000 for contumelia and US$8 000 for loss of consortium.

Tatyana filed the suit against Taderera last year after discovering that Shamu and Taderera were still dating.

She initially discovered the affair which resulted in two children and Taderera agreed to pay US$5 000 that Shamu had spent on her and her family.

Tatyana however, discovered that the affair was still on in 2021 when she went to collect part of the US$5 000 payment from Taderera and she approached the High Court.

The public auction of the property will be done by NT Auctioneers on Thursday at 143 Robertson St/ J.Tongogara Street, opposite Motor Sales from 10 am.

Property on auction includes Taderera’s three-piece kitchen unit, four-piece sofas, one coffee table, one black TV stand and Ecco Inverter with a grey battery.

The culpability of the third party in adultery has been topical in Zimbabwe for a number of years after South Africa repealed the law that allowed a spouse to sue the lover of their partner.

At least three cases have been referred to higher courts after the defendants objected to the lawsuit. The main objection is that suing of the third party by an aggrieved spouse is archaic and lacks logic as it targets an outsider instead of targeting the partner that broke the marriage contract they signed.

In July 2022 a woman appealed to the Constitutional Court to rule that the attempt to sue her for US$50 000 by her partner's former wife was unconstitutional:

“To that end, the Constitutional Court shall determine whether the common law delict of adultery sued upon by plaintiff is consistent with subs (1) of Section 56 of the Constitution in so far as it allows the plaintiff to sue the defendant whilst simultaneously precluding her from suing her former husband for the same acts upon which she sues the defendant,” the judge said.

“Whether the common law delict of adultery, as sued upon by the plaintiff, serves any rational and justifiable purpose or object protectable under the Constitution 2013.”