By Naledi Nyoni
HARARE — A lawyer representing Kundai Tibugare has denied allegations that he bought a Toyota Fortuner for a married woman at the centre of a US$200,000 adultery damages claim, arguing that she was financially capable of purchasing the vehicle herself.
In a letter dated October 8, 2026, law firm Chimuka Mafunga rejected the allegations in a response to Rubaya and Chatambudza, lawyers representing the woman’s husband, Musorowegomo Mukosi.
The response followed a letter of demand dated October 7 accusing Tibugare of having an affair with Mukosi’s wife.
“It is denied that our client bought your client’s wife a Toyota Fortuner,” Tibugare’s lawyers said.
They argued that the woman, whom they identified as a chartered accountant with more than 11 years of professional experience, could afford the vehicle without assistance from their client.
“We are advised that it is common knowledge that your client’s wife has been a Chartered Accountant for more than eleven (11) years.
“It therefore follows that she should be able to buy herself a basic Toyota Fortuner, if she did so,” the lawyers said.
Tibugare has denied having an affair with the woman and rejected the US$200,000 claim, with his lawyers disputing the allegations and the legal basis for the demand.
The letter forms part of an increasingly acrimonious dispute in which the complainant has made allegations about the nature of Tibugare’s relationship with his wife, including claims that the two were soulmates.
Tibugare’s lawyers denied that their client had enjoyed conjugal rights allegedly reserved for Mukosi.
They also rejected claims that Tibugare and the woman met twice a week outside lectures and other university activities.
Both Tibugare and the woman are studying law at the University of Zimbabwe, according to the response.
The lawyers further denied that their client and the woman spent “quality time” together in South Africa, disputing allegations that the trips were evidence of an illicit relationship.
On the Madagascar trip, they said the travel was work-related and involved professionals working on the same transaction, rather than a private getaway organised by Tibugare.
According to the letter, the woman is a chartered accountant and financial advisory consultant with Estvis Consultancy (Private) Limited, where she also serves as a director.
The lawyers said Estvis and Tibugare’s organisation were advising opposite sides of the same transaction, necessitating a trip to Madagascar by nine professionals from Zimbabwe.
They also denied that Tibugare and the woman shared a room during the trip, describing the allegation as false and damaging to their client’s reputation.
Tibugare’s lawyers also rejected other allegations concerning his conduct towards the woman, accusing Mukosi of seeking to damage their client’s professional standing by referring to his workplace.
The dispute has also spilled into the parties’ respective households.
Tibugare’s lawyers complained that the letter of demand had been served on his wife at her workplace and sent to her through WhatsApp, conduct they said was intended to provoke her and “ignite a domestic storm.”
The lawyers raised further allegations about Mukosi’s purported access to intelligence and telecommunications information, saying they had been informed that he claimed to be a member of the Central Intelligence Organisation.
According to the response, Mukosi allegedly boasted of having access to triangulation information, call logs, airport CCTV footage and other records ordinarily restricted to authorised government officials, security personnel and mobile network operators.
Tibugare’s lawyers accused him of abusing his purported position to pursue what they described as baseless allegations and threats against civilians.
They said their client reserved the right to approach the Civil Aviation Authority of Zimbabwe, the Airports Company of Zimbabwe and the Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe over the alleged access to information.
The lawyers also cited possible remedies under the Data Protection Act.
The letter further alleged that Tibugare’s wife had received anonymous calls from women claiming to be Mukosi’s sisters.
According to the lawyers, the callers allegedly threatened her and claimed to know which schools the couple’s children attended.
They characterised the alleged conduct as an abuse of office and accused Mukosi of using state apparatus to pursue personal interests. These allegations remain claims made in the legal correspondence.
Tibugare’s lawyers also challenged the legal basis of the US$200,000 demand, describing the adultery allegations as “falsified and baseless” and citing the common-law requirements for establishing adultery.
As part of their response, the lawyers said they had obtained an affidavit from Esther Vimbainashe Jerera after seeking an explanation from Mukosi’s wife over allegations and purported admissions attributed to her.
A copy of the affidavit was attached to the letter.
Tibugare’s lawyers demanded an apology, a retraction and an expression of regret, alleging that the accusations had been communicated to their client’s co-workers and family members.
They also urged the parties to de-escalate the dispute, arguing that the emotive nature of the allegations made further confrontation undesirable.
Tibugare’s lawyers reserved his right to pursue further legal remedies.
However, the allegations and denials remain claims contained in correspondence between the parties’ legal representatives.
The response letter does not establish whether adultery occurred or determine the merits of the US$200,000 damages claim.
