CCC renews legal battle against Tshabangu

By Staff Reporter
The Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) has taken its fight with self-styled party secretary-general Sengezo Tshabangu to the Supreme Court, appealing against a High Court ruling that dismissed its bid to overturn a default judgment granted in his favour.

The appeal was filed by the CCC alongside party members Sesel Zvidzai, Concillia Chinanzvavana, Gilbert Kagodora and Shepherd Mushonga. They are represented by Advocate Tawanda Zhuwarara.

In its appeal, the CCC argues that the High Court erred in law by upholding an objection questioning Tshabangu’s authority, despite the existence of three party resolutions confirming that the deponent to the founding affidavit was properly authorised to act on behalf of the party.

Zhuwarara submitted that the High Court placed undue emphasis on the form of the resolutions instead of applying the correct legal test — whether the juristic person before the court had adopted and was actively pursuing the litigation. He argued that the court wrongly impugned the CCC’s founding affidavit and concluded that the matter was improperly before it.

The CCC’s legal team further contended that even if there had been a procedural defect in the institution of the application, the court should have struck the matter off the roll rather than dismissing it outright. According to Zhuwarara, the dismissal unfairly denied the party an opportunity to cure any defect and have the matter heard on its merits.

He also criticised the High Court for making what he described as serious and definitive findings on credibility, including the conclusion that the CCC’s resolutions were recently fabricated.

“Such grave adverse findings should not be made without a proper evidential foundation and fair procedure,” Zhuwarara argued, noting that the matter before the court concerned a procedural rescission of a default judgment, not a final determination of the substantive dispute.

The CCC also submitted that the High Court wrongly treated the authority objection as fatal, despite clear evidence that the cited parties were actively participating in the proceedings through legal practitioners and the filing of substantive papers.

“Authority rules exist to prevent unauthorised litigation in a juristic person’s name, not to defeat proceedings where corporate participation objectively demonstrates awareness and adoption of the litigation,” Zhuwarara said.

The party is seeking an order setting aside the High Court’s decision with costs and wants the matter referred back to the High Court for determination before a different judge.

According to court papers, Tshabangu was expelled from the CCC in February 2025 following a disciplinary hearing chaired by Zvidzai, Chinanzvavana, Kagodora and Mushonga, who sit on the party’s disciplinary committee.

Following his expulsion, Tshabangu approached the courts on an urgent basis, seeking a declaratory order that the terms of office of CCC office bearers and main organs elected on May 26, 2019 expired on May 27, 2024. He also challenged the legality of his expulsion, arguing that the disciplinary committee’s mandate had lapsed, rendering its decision invalid.

He further sought an order declaring that the appointment of the disciplinary committee and the conduct of its proceedings were ultra vires the party’s constitution, disciplinary code and regulations.

On May 6, 2025, the CCC and its co-applicants filed an urgent application seeking rescission of the default judgment in terms of Rule 27(1) of the High Court Rules, 2021. They also sought condonation for failing to file valid opposing papers and requested an extension of time to do so.

However, the High Court dismissed the application, ruling that the deponent to the founding affidavit lacked proper authority to oppose the initial application or to seek rescission. The court struck out the founding affidavit, found the matter improperly before it, and dismissed the application with costs.

Source: NewsDay