Bona Mugabe able to pursue annulment, divorce

The daughter of late President Robert Mugabe, Bona, emerged victorious in a ruling from the High Court, as Justice Amy Tsanga dismissed an exception raised by Simbarashe Mutsahuni Chikore allowing her to pursue both an annulment application as well as the divorce application first noted in 2023.

Bona, represented by lawyer Mr Addington Chinake, had amended her original divorce summons to include a claim for annulment, a legal ruling that erases a marriage by declaring the marriage null and void and that the union was never legally valid.

This change came to light after it was revealed that Chikore was still married to Margaret Jeanine Brooks in the United States at the time of his marriage to Bona Mugabe on March 1, 2014.

The amended summons argued that their marriage was void from the start, failing to meet the legal requirements, and that Chikore had not disclosed his existing marriage. Chikore’s lawyer, Mr Rogers Matsikidze, countered this move by filing an exception to the amended summons.

He argued that Bona could not seek both annulment and divorce in the same case. “There is either a marriage or there is no marriage between the parties,” he stated firmly. Mr Matsikidze pointed to sections of the Matrimonial Causes Act, asserting that the two claims were mutually exclusive.

He expressed concern that Bona’s dual approach left Chikore uncertain about whether he was facing a divorce action or an annulment of a marriage that might not have existed at all. Mr Matsikidze insisted that the proper course would have been for Bona to withdraw her summons and file fresh ones for annulment, rather than combining both claims in one action.

Mr Chinake, however, was quick to defend Bona Mugabe’s position. He emphasised that the court had previously granted permission for the amendment by consent, meaning Chikore was fully aware of the changes.

He argued that Chikore was now trying to challenge an order that should be considered final. “A consent order extinguishes any previous order and is final,” Mr Chinake asserted.

He maintained that until the marriage was annulled, Bona Mugabe had to acknowledge its existence, as there was a valid marriage certificate. Mr Chinake accused Chikore of stalling the proceedings for over two years to avoid confronting the issue of whether the marriage was bigamous.

Mr Chinake urged the court to require Chikore to file his plea within five business days. Justice Tsanga, in her ruling, last week, clarified that the consent to amend the summons did not prevent Chikore from raising procedural objections.

She noted that the order only allowed for the filing of amended pleadings and that subsequent actions would follow the established rules.

Addressing the core of the exception, Justice Tsanga pointed out that Bona Mugabe clearly intended to seek annulment as her primary goal.

She explained that a marriage entered into while one party was still married to someone else was void, justifying a decree of nullity.

The judge indicated that there was no reason not to try the annulment first, and if that failed, the divorce action could then proceed on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of what was by then regarded as a marriage.

Justice Tsanga concluded: “While it is generally not the norm to have two causes of action in divorce summons, the ends of justice would be better served by allowing the two actions to be pleaded in the alternative.”

She affirmed that the core of the matter was Bona Mugabe’s desire to end her relationship with Chikore, whether through annulment or divorce. With the exception dismissed, Chikore was ordered to file his plea to the amended summons within five days, with costs to follow the outcome of the case. Herald