Wildlife Joint Venture and Administrative Law

Landela Safaris P/L t/a Brooklands Safaris v Chairman, Parks and Wildlife Board N.O & Another (HC 773/03)

Case Summary

CourtHigh Court of Zimbabwe

JudgeChiweshe J

PartiesLandela Safaris P/L vs Chairman, Parks and Wildlife Board N.O. & Director, National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority N.O.

TypeUrgent Chamber Application

Core IssueAccess to hunting facilities in Deka Pool Area

OutcomeApplication dismissed with costs

Joint venture proposal submitted on November 22, 2001
Proposal involved marketing Deka Pool Area for game hunting
Draft agreement prepared but never signed
Applicant proceeded with business activities:
- Spent money on marketing
- Staff visited United States
- Relied on respondents’ letter permitting area access
Minister reversed joint venture on February 25, 2003
No reasons provided for reversal

Legal Principles & Considerations

The court emphasized several key legal principles:

Powers under Parks and Wildlife Act Chapter 20:14
Minister's authority under Section 60
Requirements for urgent applications
Administrative law procedures
Domestic remedies under Section 60(4) and 60(7)
Review procedures for administrative decisions

Court's Analysis & Reasoning

The court found several fatal flaws:

Non-joinder of Minister of Tourism as respondent
Lack of signed agreement
No challenge to Minister’s powers under Section 60(4)
Failure to pursue domestic remedies
Delay in filing urgent application (3 months)
Incorrect form of application (chamber instead of court application)

Final Orders & Implications

The court ordered:

Dismissal of the application
Costs awarded against applicant

Key Implications:

Reinforces importance of proper party citation
Emphasizes need for complete agreements
Highlights significance of following proper administrative remedies
Establishes timing requirements for urgent applications
Demonstrates importance of correct procedural approach in administrative matters