Marian Chombo Gets 45% of Farm Lease Value
By Staff Reporter
HARARE- The High Court has awarded Marian Chombo 45 percent of the value of the rights and benefits held under her former husband Ignatius Chombo’s 99-year lease over Allan Grange Farm.
Justice Philipa Phillips ruled that the approximately 3,098-hectare farm remains State-owned land. The court did not transfer ownership of the land to either spouse. Instead, it determined how the economic rights arising from the registered lease should be apportioned between the former spouses as part of their matrimonial property dispute.
The ruling brings to an end a dispute over the farm that remained unresolved after the couple’s divorce in 2012. The Chombos entered into a customary marriage in 1985 before solemnising their civil marriage in May 1993. Their divorce was granted on August 31, 2012, after most of their matrimonial property issues had been resolved. The Allan Grange lease remained outstanding.
The farm, situated on the boundary of Zvimba and Mhangura, is held under a 99-year lease registered through a Notarial Deed of Lease in May 2007. The Supreme Court later remitted the matter to the High Court to determine the value of the parties’ respective interests in the lease and make an equitable distribution.
Dispute over the lease's value
Chombo argued that the lease and farming operation had little or no positive economic value when the marriage ended because the enterprise was heavily indebted. He told the court that he had obtained the farm from Government and invested substantially in its development, including tractors, combine harvesters and centre pivots.
He said banks had financed seed, fuel, machinery and labour, leaving him indebted to three banks by the time of the divorce. Chombo also told the court that he subsequently assumed responsibility for the liabilities and repaid Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe loans in 2018. His position was that the farming operation represented a financial burden rather than a valuable matrimonial asset. He said the family had largely depended on benefits he received as a Cabinet minister and that the farm had not generated profits.
He estimated that about US$2.7 million would be required to rehabilitate the farming operation and said he hoped a future joint venture could make it profitable. Marian presented a different account of the farming enterprise. She told the court that both spouses had applied for the farm and that she had helped complete the application before the lease was ultimately registered in Chombo’s name.
She said that while Chombo was largely based in Harare attending to Cabinet duties, she managed the farming operations. Her evidence included overseeing wheat, soya and commercial maize production, together with chicken, beef and dairy projects. She also told the court that proceeds from the farming activities contributed towards family expenses, including school fees for their two children. Justice Phillips found that the former spouses had operated the farming enterprise as a partnership during the marriage, with each making different but complementary contributions.
Why Marian was awarded 45 percent
The court considered the matter under Section 7 of the Matrimonial Causes Act [Chapter 5:13], which gives the High Court power to divide, apportion or distribute matrimonial assets according to the circumstances of a particular case. Justice Phillips found that Marian’s substantial contribution justified an equal division as the starting point.
The court nevertheless took into account Chombo’s responsibility for the farming liabilities after the parties separated. The judge therefore adjusted the starting point by five percentage points, resulting in Chombo receiving 55 percent and Marian 45 percent of the value of the rights and benefits attached to the lease. “Benefits come with liabilities, we take the good with the bad,” Justice Phillips said.
The judgment does not give Marian Chombo ownership of 45 percent of Allan Grange Farm itself. The land remains vested in the State. What the court apportioned between the former spouses was the economic interest represented by the rights and benefits under the 99-year lease. This distinction is important because a leasehold interest is legally different from ownership of the underlying land.
The court also allowed Marian to remain in occupation of the farmhouse, where she has lived since the 2012 divorce settlement. It directed that when her 45 percent entitlement is demarcated or otherwise given effect to, it must include the farmhouse and surrounding area.
Both former spouses were ordered to bear their own legal costs. The ruling illustrates how a long-term leasehold interest acquired during a marriage can be considered in the distribution of matrimonial property, even where the underlying land remains owned by the State.
Marian Chombo Allan Grange Farm
Comments