Kudzayi Files Application To Rescind US$100K Defamation Default Judgment For Mahere

Journalist Edmund Kudzayi has filed an application at the High Court seeking to rescind a default judgment that awarded US$100,000 in damages to prominent lawyer Fadzayi Mahere in a defamation lawsuit.

The case arises from allegations published by Kukurigo, a platform owned by Kudzayi, claiming that Mahere was romantically involved with married businessman Tinashe Murapata resulting in the breakdown of his marriage.

Kudzayi, who is represented by Gunje Legal Practice in Harare, contends that he was not in wilful default and was not afforded a fair opportunity to present his defence.

The default judgment, issued on 10 July 2025, stemmed from a civil claim brought by Mahere under case number HC3060/22.

Kudzayi maintains that the ruling was granted without proper legal process. He further argues that the case had been removed from the court roll due to Mahere’s failure to prosecute, and alleges that the court was misled regarding the case’s procedural history. Said Kudzayi:

At all material times, I have been participating in the matter, filing all papers on time, demonstrating my desire to have my defense ventilated and vindicated in open court.

Kudzayi further argues that he was prevented from attending a critical hearing due to security restrictions at the High Court, an incident he claims was acknowledged by both Mahere and her legal team.

He maintains that this obstruction resulted in his defence being struck off in his absence and without a proper legal basis. Said Kudzayi:

My defence was struck out and the matter placed on the unopposed my knowledge, apparently without a formal application (I certainly one on the consolidated record) after a hearing on 24 March 2025 before Hon Justice Wamambo, a hearing I was obstructed from attending by High Court security even though I was in the High Court building.

The fact that I was obstructed from attending the hearing by security at the High Court is known to the Court and the Defendant and her legal practitioners who, as officers of the Court, would have known that I was not in wilful default and should not have chosen to snatch at a judgment but sought to have the matter heard on the merits.

Even if the judgment is rescinded and the matter is set back to where it was, I have reasonable grounds for success in the main action.

In his application, Kudzayi argues that Mahere’s claims are unfounded and that the damages awarded are grossly inflated.

He points to previous defamation rulings in Zimbabwe, saying the US$100,000 award is unprecedented and significantly higher than any prior judgment, including Mahere’s own previous cases, where awards did not exceed US$18,000.

He maintains that misleading representations were made during the case’s reinstatement process and contends that the judgment should be rescinded, even if he is later found to have been in default or loses the main case.

He argues that no court in Zimbabwe would reasonably grant such a high award, describing it as so excessive that it constitutes a clear miscarriage of justice.

The defamation claim centres on Kudzayi’s allegations of an extramarital affair involving Mahere, which he claims is a matter of public interest.

His legal team asserts that Mahere’s claims cannot be proven without proper cross-examination and that the award is disproportionate to any alleged harm.

Kudzayi further argues that allowing the judgment to stand would legitimise what he describes as a deliberate and calculated deception, thereby undermining the integrity of the judicial process.

The matter is yet to be set down for hearing.

More: NewZimbabwe.com