• Home /
• Our Articles /
• Neutral principles of law in resolving church property disputes in Zimbabwe

Neutral principles of law in resolving church property disputes in Zimbabwe

The resolution of church property disputes in Zimbabwe is not based on church doctrine or practice, rather it is based on the “neutral principles of law”. The term “neutral principles of law” is a term applied by the American courts and was considered and adopted in Zimbabwe in the case of Independent African Church v Maheya 1998 (1) ZLR 552 (H).

Resultantly, in resolving church property disputes in Zimbabwe, the courts should not become immersed in the consideration of the merits of doctrine or practice, but determined on neutral principles. This approach has been consistently followed by the courts in Zimbabwe. see Independent Church v Maheya 2000 (1) ZLR 39 (H) and Munerwa v Reformed Church in Zimbabwe; Chikwakwata & Others v Reformed Church in Zimbabwe 2017 (2) ZLR 263 (H).

The “neutral principles of law” doctrine which was developed by the American courts for the resolution of church property disputes, and which doctrine is applicable in Zimbabwe was summarized by the Supreme Court in Sibanda & Another v Apostolic Faith Mission of Portland Oregon (Southern African Headquarters) Inc 2018 (2) ZLR 80 (S) as follows:

• Civil Courts should enforce express terms governing the use and ownership of property contained in church documents, such as constitutions, trust instruments, canons, etc.

• Civil Courts should not resolve or inquire into matters of religious doctrine in order to determine entitlement to property.

• Civil Courts may apply neutral principles of law, which are objective, well-established concepts of trust and property law and formulae familiar to lawyers and judges and avoid entanglement in religious doctrinal issues, policy and practice whether pertaining to the ritual of liturgy of worship or the tenets of faith.