High-Profile Harare Lawyer Caught in Legal Storm Over Alleged Affair

A prominent Harare lawyer, Simon Mupindu, has found himself at the center of a legal and emotional storm after his wife, Sandra Mupindu, a magistrate based in Chivhu, filed a lawsuit against a woman she accuses of having an affair with her husband.

The case, lodged at the Harare High Court, names Catherine Tatenda Chitopota—a former intern at Mupindu’s law firm—as the defendant. Sandra is demanding damages for emotional trauma and loss of conjugal rights, claiming the affair has caused significant distress and led to the breakdown of her marriage.

According to court papers, Sandra alleges that her husband has since moved in with Chitopota, effectively abandoning their marital home. The suit seeks compensation for both contumelia (insult to her dignity) and loss of consortium.

In her defense, Chitopota submitted an application to have the case dismissed. She argues that Sandra had long been aware of the relationship dating back to 2014, and therefore, the claim should be struck off due to the statute of limitations. She further claimed that traditional compensation was paid to both her and her family, rendering further legal action unnecessary.

Chitopota also challenged the legal process, stating that Simon Mupindu should have been included in the lawsuit, given his central role in the dispute.

However, Sandra rejected these claims, maintaining that the alleged affair has continued well beyond the original timeline and even after legal proceedings had begun. She argued that as long as the relationship is ongoing, the issue cannot be considered time-barred.

The matter came before Justice Fatima Maxwell, who was tasked with determining whether the case could proceed without Simon Mupindu being joined as a respondent and whether it was still within the permissible timeframe to be heard.

In her ruling, Justice Maxwell stated:

“An action for adultery is triggered by the act of sexual intercourse. If the affair is ongoing, then the claim is not extinguished by time.”

She acknowledged that some aspects of the claim may fall outside the limitation period but ruled that the continuing nature of the relationship made the defense of prescription invalid.

“The plaintiff’s statements indicate that the affair persisted even after legal action was taken. This suggests that the defendant had no intention of ending the relationship,” she said.

Addressing the issue of whether Simon Mupindu needed to be part of the suit, Justice Maxwell clarified that the non-joinder of a party does not automatically invalidate legal proceedings.

“No case shall be dismissed solely on the basis of misjoinder or non-joinder of parties,” she added.

In her sworn statement, Sandra Mupindu said Chitopota knowingly pursued a relationship with her husband, despite being aware of their longstanding and committed marriage. She claims the affair led to her husband walking out on their family to live with the other woman.

With the High Court giving the green light, the case now moves to trial.