A Harare High Court judge, Justice Phillipa Phillips-Sadza, is facing criticism for pursuing a lawsuit against CIMAS Medical Aid Society, a case described by legal professionals as “unusual,” “unnecessary,” and potentially compromising the dignity of her office. The case, filed at the Harare Magistrates Court, stems from an incident in 2021, predating her judicial appointment in June of this year, Zimlive has reported.
Justice Phillips-Sadza’s claim centres on alleged medical negligence by CIMAS. She alleges that the medical aid society delayed delivering the results of her blood tests, sending them to the wrong doctor at a different medical facility. This delay, she claims, caused her “physical distress,” citing an unexpected menstrual period as evidence, and resulted in treatment delays and time off work. She also alleges a breach of privacy.
The judge’s summons seek US$20,000 in compensation for “shock, physical and mental pain and suffering arising from CIMAS’ medical negligence.” She further claims that CIMAS failed to honour a subsequent settlement agreement. The agreement, reached after she initially issued summons in November 2021, allegedly involved waiving medical aid premiums for three months for Justice Phillips-Sadza and her ten dependents.
However, she contends that CIMAS only waived the premiums for herself and two dependents, leaving eight others unpaid. Despite attempts to negotiate a resolution, she claims CIMAS has refused to cooperate.
Several lawyers interviewed by ZimLive expressed serious concerns about the judge’s decision to pursue this case. One lawyer, who requested anonymity, stated: “Judges are expected to pick their fights wisely and exhibit a superior moral attitude in doing so. Judges must, as a general rule, not be litigants. That’s why you need to obtain leave first before suing a judge. This reality must be reflected in the decision by a judge to sue. It cuts both ways.”
Another lawyer questioned the timing of the lawsuit, highlighting the potential conflict of interest inherent in a judge appearing as a litigant in a magistrates court.
The lawyer added: “She can’t be litigating in the magistrates court. Suppose she gives evidence, can a magistrate properly make credibility findings against her? If she has to litigate, she must have a proper cause. She must be circumspect and protect the dignity of her office. What part of her missing periods is a legal claim? Do we have to talk about her ladyship’s periods? Does that not impair the dignity of her office?” The lawyer described the lawsuit as “frivolous and demeaning.”
A third lawyer, also speaking on condition of anonymity, went further, stating: “It’s just beyond the pale. It raises the question of her fitness to hold office.”
The concerns raised by these legal professionals highlight the potential conflict of interest and the perception of impropriety that arises from a High Court judge pursuing a seemingly minor claim in a lower court. The unusual nature of the case and the specific details of the claim have raised questions about the appropriateness of Justice Phillips-Sadza’s actions and their potential impact on the integrity of the judiciary.
This incident follows another recent instance where Justice Phillips-Sadza’s conduct attracted criticism. Last month, she attended a Seed Co Zimbabwe-sponsored golf day at the Borrowdale Brooke Golf Estate, an event described by one lawyer as “the biggest gathering of litigants,” given the presence of numerous top executives whose companies are involved in ongoing or anticipated High Court cases.
The cumulative effect of these events raises further questions about the judge’s conduct and its potential implications for public confidence in the judiciary.
