Grizzly, Pridegems deny trespass claims in Lufwanyama mine dispute

By GRACE CHAILE

GRIZZLY Mining Limited and Pridegems Mines Limited have denied allegations of trespassing and conducting unauthorized mining activities on an exploration site legally held by Chuvumbwe Mining Limited in Lufwanyama District on the Copperbelt.
In their defence filed before court, the two companies refuted the claims, insisting they had not entered or operated on the land covered by Small Scale Exploration Licence No. 38563-HQ-SEL, which is held by Chuvumbwe.
Through their legal representatives, Chali Chitala Advocates, the defendants stated that they had never asserted ownership over the disputed area and challenged the plaintiff to provide strict proof of its claims.
They indicated their intention to call three witnesses during trial to support their defence.
Chuvumbwe Mining Limited, incorporated on August 18, 2007, with its registered office in Livingstone, Southern Province, holds the four-year exploration licence issued on September 18, 2024.
The licence grants it exclusive rights to explore for beryllium, emerald, and quartz within a designated area in Lufwanyama.
According to Chuvumbwe’s statement of claim, the company also obtained a Pegging Certificate in November 2024, supported by Diagram No. 20169/24, which clearly defines the geographical boundaries of its licensed area. The company secured consent from Chief Nkana VII of Kalulushi District to carry out exploration works within the chiefdom.
The dispute reportedly arose after Chuvumbwe commissioned a drone survey on May 10, 2025, by A & A Geospatial Consultants, aimed at mapping the area and verifying boundary compliance. During the survey, Chuvumbwe’s team allegedly observed active mining and water-pumping operations within its licensed zone.
Two days later, on May 12, Chuvumbwe personnel visited the site and confronted individuals believed to be employees or agents of Grizzly Mining and Pridegems Mines. According to Chuvumbwe, the individuals claimed ownership of the area, even though the Mining Cadastre system recognized Chuvumbwe as the legitimate licensee.
The plaintiff claimed that the defendants failed to present any legal documentation to support their assertions and accused them of wrongfully entering the area and conducting unauthorized operations.
Chuvumbwe argued that the continued activities by the defendants infringed upon its exclusive rights and caused harm to its business operations.