The death of businessman Wicknell Chivayo has changed the legal position in his ongoing US$25 million matrimonial and property dispute with his former wife, So...
The death of businessman Wicknell Chivayo has changed the legal position in his ongoing US$25 million matrimonial and property dispute with his former wife, Sonja Madzikanda, after his Supreme Court appeal was removed from the court roll. Chivayo and his wife, Lucy Muteke, were among those who died in a helicopter crash in Zimbabwe on September 30, 2026.
The Supreme Court matter concerned a dispute over matrimonial property and other assets following the breakdown of Chivayo’s relationship with Madzikanda. According to the Herald report, Chivayo’s lawyer, Advocate Sylvester Hashiti, confirmed that the case was removed from the roll following his client’s death.
Advocate Hashiti said the matter could be brought back before the court once Chivayo’s estate had a legally recognised representative. “The matter was removed from the roll on account of the appellant’s demise until such a time he is substituted by his executor or executrix who will represent him in court as concerns any claims against his estate,” he said.
The development means the death of Chivayo does not automatically bring the wider property dispute to an end. Instead, the legal interests previously represented by him will have to be dealt with through the administration of his estate and, where necessary, through the courts.
Madzikanda had previously made a claim involving US$25 million as part of the matrimonial dispute. Her claims also included monthly spousal maintenance, properties, vehicles and other assets associated with Chivayo. The case therefore covered more than a single cash payment and involved questions about the division of assets following the end of their relationship.
The dispute had already produced several court proceedings before Chivayo’s death. In April 2026, the High Court approved a consent arrangement under which Chivayo agreed to pay US$5 million towards maintenance and investment for the couple’s two minor children. The court order recorded that US$2.2 million had already been paid, with the remaining US$2.8 million due within 30 days.
The April settlement also provided for a parenting arrangement involving the couple’s children. Madzikanda was granted primary residence, while Chivayo was given specified periods of access, including one uninterrupted week each month, weekends and alternate public holidays. The court order also required Chivayo to be personally available during his periods of access.
However, the settlement did not resolve the separate question of how the former couple’s property interests would be divided. The April High Court order stated that the proprietary consequences of the termination of the union would be dealt with under a separate case, identified as HCHF 62/2026.
The wider dispute had also included arguments over the nature and status of the relationship between Chivayo and Madzikanda. Court papers cited in reporting on the case said the couple entered into a customary law union in July 2017 and had two minor children. Chivayo’s legal team had disputed aspects of Madzikanda’s claims, including the legal consequences of the relationship and her entitlement to certain claims.
In June 2026, Chivayo also sought to have Madzikanda’s broader property and asset claims struck out. The High Court dismissed that application with costs, allowing the wider dispute to continue. The ruling was reported as having relied partly on the earlier consent arrangement between the parties.
The latest development follows Chivayo’s death in a helicopter crash near Harare. Police later identified Chivayo and Lucy Muteke among those who died, while authorities said investigations into the crash were continuing. Reuters reported that President Emmerson Mnangagwa confirmed Chivayo’s death on October 1.
The administration of Chivayo’s estate will now become an important part of the legal process surrounding claims against his assets. According to the Herald report, the Master of the High Court will be involved in the formal registration of the estate and the appointment of an executor or executrix to represent it.
The appointment of an executor or executrix will allow legal claims involving the estate to be addressed through the appropriate process. If claims are disputed, the parties can use the available legal procedures to seek determination of those disputes.
The question of whether Chivayo left a valid will could also affect how his estate is administered. The Herald reported that where a valid will exists, the estate would generally be dealt with according to its provisions, subject to applicable legal requirements. If there is no valid will, succession would instead be governed by the applicable law on deceased estates.
Chivayo’s two minor children are also relevant to the administration of the estate. The Herald reported that the children’s welfare, including their maintenance, healthcare and education, would have to be considered during the estate administration process.
The US$25 million figure in the case should therefore not be treated as a confirmed valuation of Chivayo’s estate. It relates to the amount sought in the matrimonial dispute, while the wider estate may contain various assets, liabilities and other legal claims that must be established through the estate administration process.
Chivayo’s death has consequently moved the legal dispute into a different stage. The Supreme Court appeal cannot continue in his name while the estate lacks a representative, but claims connected to the matrimonial dispute can still be dealt with through the executor or executrix once appointed.
The immediate legal process will therefore centre on the formal administration of Chivayo’s estate and the identification of the person authorised to represent it. Any outstanding claims involving the former couple’s property, maintenance and other financial matters will then be considered within that process.
