Is it possible in Zimbabwe for a ‘Host’ to Evict a Guest who has overstayed?

The tourism and leisure industry in the country contributes significantly towards Zimbabwe’s economy. The tourism and leisure law that generally applies to inn-keepers, hoteliers and restauranteurs in South Africa, and England and Wales appears to be the same as that which applies in Zimbabwe.

The law concerning hotel-keepers (hotel owners) or inn-keepers (as they were traditionally called) in South Africa is the same as that applying in Zimbabwe. For a start, this means that any person who is booked as a guest in a house, flat, apartment, room, hotel, motel, inn, guest house, boarding house, residential establishment, holiday accommodation unit, chalet, tent, caravan, camping site, houseboat, or similar establishment in Zimbabwe or any part of Zimbabwe is not regarded by the law to be a ‘tenant’ but is regarded by law as a ‘lodger’.

It goes without saying that there is ordinarily no contract of letting and hiring between a proprietor of inns, restaurants, and lodging houses i.e., landlord and tenant agreement. The agreement between a landlord and tenant is distinct from that of a guest and an hotel owner or inn-keeper. see Rent Control Board & Another v Beach Villas (Pty) Ltd 1944 AD 16.

In terms of the common law applicable in Zimbabwe, a lodger does not have exclusive occupation of the premises. The contract of board and loading is regarded as a contract of a special nature. Resultantly, a guest / lodger is regarded by law as anyone who occupies a room in a house, flat, apartment, hotel, guesthouse, houseboat which room he / she retains control over.

It follows that in terms of the common law in Zimbabwe a lodger is not a tenant, and consequently a lodger / guest is not and will not be protected by the tenancy laws in Zimbabwe. Put differently, the tenancy laws in Zimbabwe do not apply to ‘guests’ booked in bed and breakfasts (B&Bs), hotels, guest houses. It is thus permissible to have the guests ‘evicted’ if and when they overstay. It is a settled position of our law that no one has the ‘right to remain for an indefinite time in the absence of special agreement.’ see Lomax v Killarney of Durban (Pty) Ltd 1961 (2) SA 573 (N).