Zimpapers Logo

year failed to supply irrigation water for his 90-hectare tobacco crop.
This resulted in the farmer losing the entire crop.
In his application at the High Court, Mr Timothy Curtis Jackson, the owner of Ruya Ranch Farm accused the water authority of breaching the contract to supply him with 250 000 cubic metres of water.

ZINWA

• Turnall loses US$16m deal
• Massive wheat imports expected as deficit looms
  

However, Zinwa has dismissed the allegations and any liability saying it had always provided water to Mr Jackson but he failed to use it.
Mr Jackson represented by Mwonzora and Associates submitted that on or around July 2010 he entered into an agreement with Zinwa under which the authority was required to supply him with 250 000 cubic metres of water for a period of six months commencing August 1, 2010.

“Basing on the contract, the plaintiff planned to cultivate 90 hectares of tobacco among other crops. However, in breach of contract the plaintiff (Zinwa) failed, refused or neglected to supply the water as agreed resulting in loss to the plaintiff,” he submitted.

The farmer averred that Zinwa was supposed to have supplied him water from Katanya Dam and as a result suffered damages of US$4 371 000.
Mr Jackson said he anticipated yield of the tobacco crop to be 3 400kg per hectare and would sell it at about US$3,50 per kg.

The farmer is also demanding compensation for wastage costs of replacing the failed crop, wasted mileage and communication costs trying to source water, costs of laying off some workers and costs of attempting to install water pipes.

He is also claiming damages for loss of his tobacco, chillies and gum tree nursery, damages due to closing down by tobacco contractors and other consequential damages due to loss of other crops, including maize and cotton seed.

However, Zinwa through their lawyers Chinamasa, Mudimu and Dondo admitted that there was an agreement but the water had to come from Amanda Dam subject to terms and conditions to be met by Mr Jackson.
“It was further agreed in terms of the agreement that plaintiff was to install at his own expense devices for the abstraction of the water at agreed points, keep and maintain the installation pumping of the raw water at his own expense. The onus was on the plaintiff to abstract the water and defendant (Zinwa) has always made the water available to plaintiff,” Zinwa submitted. Zinwa said it was Mr Jackson who failed to abstract water from the said dam and it had nothing to do with his failure to abstract the allocated water.

“Defendant denies that it has breached any terms of the contract and plaintiff is put to the proof of any such breach,” Zinwa submitted.
Zinwa further denied that the farmer suffered the damages as claimed or any damages at all arising from its actions or inaction.

The case has since been referred to trial.
According to pre-trial conference minutes Justice Andrew Mutema will establish whether or not the farmer entered into an agreement with Zinwa.