1. Is there animal legislation in Zimbabwe?

Yes, there is animal law legislation in Zimbabwe. Some of the laws enacted by the Government concerning animal law in Zimbabwe include the following:

1. (a) Animal Health Act [Chapter 19:01]
2. (b) Bees Act [Chapter 19:02]
3. (c) Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act [Chapter 9:23]
4. (d) Firearms Act [Chapter 10:09]
5. (e) Parks and Wildlife Act [Chapter 20:14]
6. (f) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act [Chapter 19:09]
7. (g) Protection of Wild Life (Indemnity) Act [Chapter 20:15]
8. (h) Scientific Experiments on Animals Act [Chapter 19:12]
9. (i) Quelea Control Act [Chapter 19:10]
10. (j) Trapping of Animals (Control) Act [Chapter 20:21]
11. (k) Veterinary Surgeons Act [Chapter 27:16].

2. Are there any hunting laws in Zimbabwe?

Yes. Hunting in Zimbabwe is regulated by the Parks and Wild Life Act [Chapter 20:14] and the Parks and Wild Life (General) Regulations, 1990. It is therefore a criminal offence to hunt without a permit / license in Zimbabwe. see S v Maranga & Others 1991 (1) ZLR 244 (SC).

3. What is Part XII of the Parks and Wild Life Act?

Part XII of the Parks and Wild Life Act [Chapter 20:14] (‘the Act’) is the specific part of the Act which deals with hunting, removal, viewing and sale of animals and animal products in Zimbabwe. Resultantly, Part XII of the Act is an important provision of the law in Zimbabwe in so fa as hunting and sale of animals is concerned.

4. Do I require a permit to hunt animals in Zimbabwe?

Yes. In terms of the Parks and Wild Life (General) Regulations, 1990 one is required to obtain a hunting permit, otherwise known as a TR2 Form, which is issued by the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (‘ZimParks’).

It is an offence to hunt animals except in terms of a permit issued by ZimParks in Zimbabwe. see S v Osborne 1989 (3) ZLR 326 (SC).

5. Are there any proposed amendments to the Parks and Wildlife Act in Zimbabwe?

Yes, the Government through the Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill H.B., 1, 2024 seeks to amend the Parks and Wildlife Act [Chapter 20:14] and to repeal the Trapping of Animals Control Act [Chapter 20:21] and the Quelea Control Act [Chapter 19:10] and to provide for matters connected therewith or incidental to the foregoing.

6. What is the Human – Wildlife Conflict Relief Fund (HWCRF) in Zimbabwe?

The Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill H.B., 1, 2024 seeks to establish in Zimbabwe a Fund known as the Human Wildlife Conflict Relief Fund (HWCRF) whose main objective will be to offer monetary relief to victims of human wildlife conflict, that is to say victims of any encounter with wild animals in Zimbabwe resulting in the death a victim, or his or her maiming i.e., permanent disablement, or other physical injury,

7. Is it possible to sue a Game Park in Zimbabwe for damage caused by a Wild Animal?

By nature, animals are not human beings, who are expected to act in a specified manner at all times. It is common sense, that wild animals, are not and cannot be expected to be decent and well-behaved. It is for this reason, that such animals are generally kept in captivity or in secluded areas. Furthermore, owners and proprietors of such animal sanctuaries, have notices exempting them from liability.

Notwithstanding the above, it is possible to sue an animal sanctuary, game park or other establishment where wild animals are kept, for damage which may have been caused by such wild animals. see Bristow v Lycett 1971 (4) SA 223 (RA).

8. Suing in Zimbabwe for damage and harm caused by someone’s animal

In Zimbabwe, like in other countries, it is permitted at law, to bring a actio de pauperie i.e., a claim for damages due to the conduct of another person’s domestic animal where no one else is to blame. In order to succeed, one must establish that:

1. (a) The defendant was the owner of the animal where damage was inflicted;
2. (b) The animal which inflicted the damage is a domestic animal;
3. (c) The plaintiff was lawfully present at the location where damage was inflicted
4. (d) The animal acted contrary to its nature or class
5. (e) The animal must have caused the damage spontaneously from an inward excitement or vice.

The case of Odendaal v Inn on the Ruparara 2006 (1) ZLR 1 (H) also deals with the principles to ground in an actio de pauperie in Zimbabwe.

9. Is actio de pastu part of Zimbabwean law?

An actio de pastu is a claim which can be traced to Roman Law and enduring in Zimbabwe in terms of which, one is able to bring a claim for damages caused by ordinary animals i.e., livestock, according to their natural disposition, for any harm caused.

The courts in Zimbabwe are unanimous that an actio de pastu still forms part of the law of Zimbabwe, and that it has not fallen into disuse. Thus, if one person’s animals stray onto another person’s land and cause damage by grazing or trampling crops, the actio de pastu is available to the owner of the land against the owner of the animals for the damage caused by them. see Heron v Skinner 1970 (2) RLR 105 (A); 1971 (1) SA 399 (RA) and Bwanya v Matanda 2000 (1) ZLR 546 (H).

10. What are the requirements for an actio de pastu in Zimbabwe?

An actio de pastu is a delictual claim that one brings to recover damages in respect of harm done to land by domesticated animals trespassing therein and through the grazing of grass, crops, shrubs (including the destruction of such crops).

Liability is strict and based on ownership, the rationale for this is premised on the fact that the person gets the benefit of another’s grazing. The requirements which have been laid down by the courts include the following:

1. (a) Damage to plants, crops or pastures;
2. (b) A domesticated animal trespassing onto another’s property;
3. (c) A casual link between the harm and the trespassing;
4. (d) The defendant must be the owner of the animals;
5. (e) The harm must be caused through the eating of plants, crops or pastures; and
6. (f) The animal must have acted on its own volition.

11. Are there any defences to an actio de pastu in Zimbabwe?

Yes. The following defences are available to a party facing an actio de pastu in Zimbabwe:

1. (a) That the plaintiff was to blame for the animal’s action;
2. (b) That there was negligence on the part of the controller of the animals;
3. (c) That someone else or something else provoked the animals thus it did not behave from inside vice or excitement;
4. (d) That the plaintiff was not lawfully on the premises; and
5. (e) Volenti non fit injuria.

12. Does a cattle owner owe a duty to motorists to keep cattle off the road?

The history of Zimbabwe is founded on farming and agriculture. It is for this reason, that both colonial and post – independence courts, have not instated on taking extraordinary precautions which may have the effect of putting cattle ranchers out of business.

Zimbabwean farmers are required by law to take measures to guarantee that cattle do not stray into the road. Equally, motorists using public roads such as highways which pass though cattle country, even where there are proper fences on either side of the roads to keep in cattle, must expect that on occasions a beast might escape onto the road. see Rocky Lodge (Pvt) Ltd v Livie 1977 (1) RLR 218; 1977 (3) 231 (RA).

13. Are there specific laws or regulations concerning dogs in Zimbabwe?

Yes. Most local authorities, that is urban councils and municipalities have in place laws and regulations in the form of by – laws. For instance, Epworth Local Board (Dog Licensing and Control), By – Laws 2019.

14. Is it possible to sue and claim damages for dog bites in Zimbabwe?

Yes, it is possible to sue and claim damages from an owner of a dog which has attacked you, and where you are injured, and where there was no provocation. In terms of the common law, the owner of the dog is held liable, to make good any resulting damages.

15. What are some of the successful claims which have been brought against owners of dogs in Zimbabwe?

There are a significant number of cases which have been brought before the courts for adjudication against owners of dogs in Zimbabwe. Some of the leading cases, include but are not limited to:

1. (a) Wallman v Leathes 1969 (2) RLR (G);
2. (b) Svamvur v Portwood 1970 (1) SA 144 (R);
3. (c) Portwood v Svamvur 1970 (1) RLR 225 (A); 1970 (4) SA 8 (RA);
4. (d) Joyce v Venter 1979 RLR 478 (GD);
5. (e) Msorwa v Munyuki 1994 (2) ZLR 261 (SC).

16. What do you do when a dog bites you?

After a dog attack, the most important thing is to seek medical attention for yourself or your loved one. Once you are safe or have been treated for bites and wounds, it is important to consult with a duly registered legal practitioner or law firm with experience in personal injury law. An experienced legal practitioner / law firm will assist you with the relevant information required to pursue a claim against the dog owner.

17. What sort of information do I require for a legal consultation for a dog bite?

It is important to maintain records and documents. Thus, where you have been attacked and would want to bring a claim, it is important to have witness statements, photographic evidence, medical records and reports together with an incident report from the Zimbabwe Republic Police. However, it is important to schedule a consultation with a duly registered legal practitioner or law firm with expertise in personal injury law in Zimbabwe.

18. Can you keep dogs that are a nuisance?

In terms of the law in Zimbabwe, no person is allowed to keep any dog which, by consent or excessive barking, howling or whining or by straying property, creates a disturbance, or destroys the comfort of any other person. Furthermore, the defilement of another person’s property, public places and public roads by dogs is deemed to constitute conduct which creates a disturbance or a nuisance which affects the comfort, peace or tranquillity of the neighbourhood where such a dog is kept.

19. What happens if a dog is a nuisance?

Where repeated complaints of nuisance or dangerous incidents to members of the public due to the keeping of a dog by any owner are brought to the attention of the Local Authority, i.e., City of Harare, City of Victoria Falls, Epworth Local Board (‘the Council’), the latter, through its health inspectors or authorized officers, may give written notice to the owner concerned that if any further complaint is brought to the attention of council within a period specified in the notice, the council may prohibit any owner from keeping any dog within the council area for a period not exceeding three years.

To succeed in a claim for nuisance, one has to show that the nuisance was not temporary or reasonable. It must be shown that there was constant whining, barking, straying of the dog onto another property or defiling of another person’s property which destroyed the comfort, peace or tranquillity of the neighbourhood. see S v Stokie 1980 ZLR 280.

20. Is it a legal requirement to register and license a dog in Zimbabwe?

Yes. Each local authority / municipality has its own laws and regulations concerning the licensing and control of dogs in its jurisdiction. These laws are usually in the form of by-laws which are aimed to ensure that there is comfort, peace or tranquillity in the neighbourhoods in which the dogs are kept, and that such dogs are not a nuisance. It is therefore a legal requirement in Zimbabwe, for each owner of a dog to register and license their dogs. Thus, each municipality has a register of all dogs which have been licensed. The record shows:

1. (a) The name and address of the owner of such dog; and
2. (b) The number and date of issue of –
3. (c) The licence and license badge; and

21. Should a dog always have a badge?

Yes, in terms of the applicable laws in Zimbabwe, every owner of a dog should ensure that a licensed dog shall have its licensed badge affixed to the collar fastened around the dog’s neck.

22. Is there a law regulating rabies in Zimbabwe?

Yes. The Animal Health (Rabies) Regulations, 1966 provide for rabies regulations in Zimbabwe. In terms of this law, domestic animals are required to be vaccinated. If domestic animals are not vaccinated, the owners are liable to be penalised for being in contravention of this piece of legislation which carries penalties. see R v Van Meerdervoort 1957 (2) SA 23 (SR)..

23. Is there a Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) in Zimbabwe?

Yes. The Zimbabwe National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (‘ZNSPCA’) is a governing body which was established in Zimbabwe in the 1960s. The importance of national societies against the prevention of cruelty to animals worldwide, including Zimbabwe, was pointed out by the South African Constitutional Court in the matter of National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development & Another 2017 (1) SACR 284 (CC); 2017 (4) BCLR 517 (CC) at para 1 as follows”

“From the ancient Khoisan reverence of the eland to the contemporary conception of the dog as “man’s best friend”, humans and animals have a storied relationship, one that is a part of the fabric of our society, homes and lives.  Animals have shifted from being “mere brutes or beasts” to “fellow beasts, fellow mortals or fellow creatures” and finally to “companions, friends and brothers.” To protect these voiceless companions, individuals have time and again stepped in when animals are mistreated.  Around the world, societies similar to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NSPCA) zealously defend their welfare.  These organisations champion the norm that we do not accept acts of cruelty against those who cannot defend themselves, a norm finding its origins in 1635. The question before us is whether the NSPCA is entitled to privately prosecute crimes of animal cruelty connected with its mandate.”

24. What is considered as cruelty to animals in Zimbabwe?

The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act [Chapter 19:09] (the Act) in Zimbabwe addresses the issue of cruelty to animals. However, the Act does not define the term cruelty. The Supreme Court in S v Lamprecht 1983 (3) ZLR 278 (S) adopted the definition in the case of R v Sibeko 1951 (2) SA 41 (E) 43 which defines cruelty as follows:

“When however, a person without any compulsion thereto, of his own free will elects to do something, which he knows must in the ordinary way produce pain and he does that act not accidentally or under circumstances negativing intention to perform that act, then he does that act intentionally and wilfully."

25. What offenses constitute animal cruelty in Zimbabwe?

In order to constitute animal cruelty, there has to be evidence to suggest the ill – treatment of any animal, with the intention of causing it unnecessary suffering. see R v W 1960 (4) SA 692 (SR).

Section 3 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act [Chapter 19:09] (‘PCAA’) contains a list of some of the criminal offenses which arise in terms of the PCAA. Thus, any person who

• cruelly beats, kicks, ill-treats, overrides, overdrives, overloads or tortures any animal or causes any animal so to be used; or
• drives or uses any animal which is so diseased or so injured or in such a physical condition that it is unfit to do any work; or
• being the owner, abandons any animal or causes or permits any animal to be abandoned; or
• by wantonly or unreasonably doing or omitting to do any act or by causing or procuring the commission or omission of any act, causes any unnecessary suffering to any animal; or
• wantonly or unreasonably does or causes or procures the commission of any act likely to infuriate or terrify any animal; or
• being the owner, permits in any manner aforesaid any unnecessary suffering to be caused to any animal or permits such animal to be infuriated or terrified as aforesaid; or
• cruelly or unnecessarily ties up or confines any animal or causes or permits any animal so to be tied up or confined; or
• conveys or carries or causes or procures or, being the owner, permits to be conveyed or carried, any animal in such a manner or position as to cause that animal any unnecessary suffering; or
• causes, procures or assists at the fighting of any animal, or keeps, uses, manages or acts or assists in the management of any premises or place used for the purpose or partly for the purpose of fighting any animal, or permits any premises or place so to be kept, managed or used, or receives or causes or procures any person to receive any money for the admission of any person to such premises or place; or
• without any reasonable cause or excuse, administers or causes or procures, or, being the owner, permits the administration of, any poisonous or injurious drug or substance to any animal or, without any reasonable cause or excuse, causes any such poison or substance to be taken by any animal; or
• subjects or causes or procures, or, being the owner, permits to be subjected, any animal to any operation which is performed without due care and humanity; shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding level five or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.