Trust Freddy

BAINES Imaging Group (BIG) returned to its premises at the Avenues Clinic yesterday after successfully enforcing a High Court order granting it execution pending appeal of a spoliation order, reversing the facility’s forcible closure.

A spoliation order is a legal remedy that restores a party to peaceful and undisturbed possession of property from which it has been unlawfully and forcibly dispossessed.

The medical imaging provider, which had been removed from the hospital’s radiology department, is now back in “peaceful and undisturbed possession” of its leased spaces.

These include the Diagnostic Imaging Department, the CT Scan Suite (Computed Tomography) and the advanced 3T MRI Suite (3 Tesla Magnetic Resonance Imaging).

The reoccupation followed a High Court ruling that superseded the automatic suspension caused by an appeal filed by The Avenues Clinic (Medical Investments Ltd).

BIG staff, assisted by police officers and the Sheriff of the High Court, executed the order.

Locks that had been chained by their rivals were removed and replaced, allowing the imaging group to fully resume operations and restore essential diagnostic services.

The ruling, which granted leave to execute the original spoliation order (HCH 4060/25), stated: “The applicant, with the assistance of the Zimbabwe Republic Police and/or the Sheriff of the High Court of Zimbabwe, be and is hereby granted leave to execute the judgment of this court per MAXWELL J under HCH 4060/25.”

The dispute began in August when BIG staff and management were physically removed from the hospital, an action it condemned as “illegal and dangerous”.

BIG first secured a spoliation order on August 20, 2025 directing the restoration of the unlawfully seized property.

However, the appeal by the Avenues Clinic temporarily frustrated its execution.

“So, when the dispute occurred, Medical Investment Pvt Ltd brought bouncers, locksmiths, chained the locks to the rooms and threw our client out,” Mr Everson Chatambudza, BIG’s lawyer, said.

“Our client rushed to court, we got an order for spoliation, but unfortunately, the other party filed an appeal. By operation of law, the appeal then suspended the execution of the order. We applied for execution pending appeal, which brought us to today.”

He added that the latest application was necessary as the initial appeal had suspended the spoliation order.

“The application for execution pending appeal was solely to say to the court: once they are pursuing the appeal, can you allow our client to execute the order for spoliation, which restored possession to our client,” he said.

Original source: zw