From A1

“He refused to give the client a copy assuring him that he would get one once all directors had signed. Using fraud, misrepresentation and the same tactics…all of which are reminiscent of the infamous Rudd Concession of 1888, Mr Nyasowa directed our client to lie on the transfer forms that the purchase price was Us$5 000,” the papers said.

PLZ later paid Mubaira Us$8 415, instead of the agreed Us$55 000, court documents showed. However, Mubaira is said to have stormed PLZ offices, after which an executive directed staff to “treat him to tea and biscuits” while a fresh “Rudd Concession” was being drafted, the lawyers said.

After getting winds that Huayou was coming into the picture, Mubaira confronted PLZ again, but he was “dismissed off hand with the retort that PLZ’s lawyers would deal with whatever claim” he would bring up.

In their letter to the Chinese firm, Mubaira’s lawyers warned that Huayou’s interests would be at stake unless the deadlock over settlement was addressed.

“Our client is the legal owner of a mining block situated on his farm, Lowfield in Arcturus,” Mubaira’s legal counsel wrote in a letter sent to Huayou dated March 23, 2022.

“Our client contends he was defrauded of his aforesaid legal interest by PLZ. Our client became aware of the contract you entered into, and are in the process of consummating with PLZ. His contention is that to the extent that the subject matter for which you contracted with PLZ contains his mining interests, you were unknowingly and fraudulently dragged into a fraud. In our law, and we believe certainly in your own jurisdiction too, fraudulent contracts cannot birth legal and commercially enforceable contracts.

"Our professional and courteous attempts to seek dialogue with your local partners have been rebuffed. It seems to us that your local partners consider our client’s claim to be baseless. In fact, they are on record accusing him of being a fraudster and extortionist. The practice in Zimbabwe is that before litigation, a claimant should give his adversary an opportunity to reply. While we are ready to file a claim against you and your local partners, it is only fair that we draw your attention to facts that our client believes were deliberately withheld from you.

"We are obviously aware of what effect such bob disclosure/s have on your own contract with PLZ. Our client’s brief to us is for us to recover his mining interest from whoever is laying claim to it, which bracket we believe you belong…the courtesy extended to you herein is not a sign of weakness on our client’s part,” Mubaira’s lawyers wrote to Huayou.

“sometime in July or August 2018, geologists from PLZ sought and obtained permission to prospect on our client’s farm (Lowfield), for lithium,” Mandizha & Company wrote in another letter to PLZ lawyers, Manokore Attorneys.

“Our client is the registered owner of a gold mining block on the said farm.”

The Huayou /PLZ transaction was subject to a series of regulatory approvals in Zimbabwe and China.

Zimbabwe has benefitted from big Chinese investments in the past two decades, which have kept the southern African country running during a tough time when foreign direct investment plummeted in the aftermath of hard-hitting Western sanctions on the southern African country.

The massive push by Chinese investors into Zimbabwe’s multibillion dollar lithium mines has raised fresh fears of plunder with a leading resource campaigner pushing for stronger Parliamentary oversight.