High Court judge Justice Gladys Mhuri has dismissed the application to set aside the default judgment filed by lawyer Tendai Biti after rejecting his other application for an exception in the matter of a lawsuit against him for defamation by Augur Investments.
In his request to overturn the default judgment, Beatty cited Augur Investments, the company’s chief operating officer Tatiana Aleshina, CEO Kenneth Raydon Sharpe, and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change Alliance party as respondents.
Augur Investments is seeking $500,000 in damages from Biti, while Sharpe and Aleshina are seeking $400,000 and $100,000, respectively.
Sharpe separately called out the opposition party for pursuing a malign agenda based on Beatty’s tweets.
On March 1 last year, Superior Court Judge Jacob Manzonzo entered a default judgment against Beatty in the defamation case.
Beatty then filed a motion to vacate the default judgment.
The background to the matter is that sometime in December 2020, Beatty allegedly published two statements that were considered defamatory of Augur Investments, its senior officials Sharp and Aleshina, and several other prominent businessmen.
Augur Investments officials immediately issued defamation summonses against Biti under Case No. HC 7528/20.
Beatty then raised an exception and special appeal, which Judge Manzonzo denied.
Aggrieved by the dismissal, Beattie applied for leave to appeal to the High Court, an application which had also previously been refused
Judge Manzonzo in default.
Beatty later applied to the Supreme Court under SC 143/23 but later withdrew the application.
He then filed a further application under SC 274/23, which was overturned by Judge Alvas Chitakuni on the grounds that Petit should apply to set aside Judge Manzonzo’s ruling because it was a judgment in absentia.
In the latest development, Judge Mahuri said that she first dealt with the condonation application taking into account, among other things, the duration of the delay, the explanation for the delay, the prospects of success, and the finality of the litigation.
Judge Muhuri said the ruling in question was made on March 1 last year, and the last application was submitted in June 2023, meaning there was a three-month delay.
She said that the delay, from her point of view, was exaggerated.
“The applicant’s (Betty) explanation for the delay is that he was pursuing applications he had made before the High Court. After his second application was canceled on 7 June 2023, he was trying to obtain reasons from the High Court for the strike-out decision.
“He said his request should be granted because there were reasonable grounds for the delay and that granting this request was in the interests of justice.
“He further said that he did not understand that the judgment passed by (Judge) Manzunzu was a judgment in absentia because he had sent Tapiwa Chibandu to represent him.
“I find the applicant’s explanation unsatisfactory. It is trivial that the default judgment is not subject to appeal,” Justice Muhuri said.
“It is also not disputed that the applicant is an experienced legal practitioner. He therefore knew that the default judgment was not subject to appeal but chose not to seek annulment and resorted to the Supreme Court.
“Even before the Supreme Court, he was represented by legal practitioners of good standing who should have known better.”
Justice Mhuri also said that Chibando, who was sent by Biti to represent him before Justice Manzonzo, was present when the default judgment was delivered, adding that the former Finance Minister was aware that a default judgment had been issued as of March 1, 2023.
She added that Beatty was initially represented by Jacob Mafumi, but on the date of the hearing, he sent an attorney from his own law firm when Mafumi would not relinquish agency.
Muhuri said the trial of the defamation suit must reach a final stage.
“Therefore, an order was issued to dismiss the application to condone the late filing of the cancellation application with costs,” Justice Muhuri said. Newsday