|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| January 2026 |
|
|
The applicant failed to establish constitutional breaches; English court had jurisdiction and direct access was dismissed.
Direct access — interests of justice — prospects of success; Right to fair hearing (s69(2)) — delay in reasons requires proof of prejudice; Equality before the law (s56(1)) — must show unequal treatment of similarly placed persons; Jurisdiction in matrimonial proceedings — domicile under Immigration Act s3(4) — loss of Zimbabwe domicile by prolonged absence; Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments — jurisdiction, finality, public policy; Right to a home (s74) — not engaged where foreign court lawfully exercises discretion in divorce property division.
|
20 January 2026 |
| July 2025 |
|
|
|
29 July 2025 |
|
Direct access refused; Supreme Court validly set aside an arbitral award awarding consequential damages excluded by contract.
Arbitration law – enforcement and setting aside of awards – public policy under Model Law – sanctity of contract; Constitutional procedure – direct access – review of Supreme Court judgments on non-constitutional matters; Constitutional rights – equal protection (s 56(1)) and fair hearing (s 69(2)); three-tier test for constitutional review of final appellate decisions
|
24 July 2025 |
|
Direct access granted where Supreme Court decision validated trial irregularities that prima facie compromised fair trial rights.
Constitutional law — Direct access — Reviewability of Supreme Court decisions in non-constitutional matters — Interlocutory appeals and binding effect — Right to fair trial (s 69(2)) — Equal protection (s 56(1)) — Assessment of general damages without quantum evidence.
|
21 July 2025 |
|
Direct access refused: applicant failed to show Supreme Court acted unlawfully or violated fair-hearing and equality rights; tax-appeal remedies available.
Constitutional review — direct access — extraordinary remedy; discretion to crystallize issues; non-constitutional Supreme Court decisions; availability of specialized tax appeals; s56 equality; s69 fair hearing
|
8 July 2025 |
| May 2025 |
|
|
Direct access denied; applicant’s challenge to Supreme Court judgment raised factual, not constitutional, issues and lacked prospects of success.
Constitutional procedure — Direct access under s 167(5) and r 21(2) — Challenge to a Supreme Court judgment under s 85(1) — Finality of Supreme Court decisions — Requirement to plead a constitutional violation with precision — Fair trial (s 69(1)) and equal protection (s 56(1)) — Liability of co-perpetrators: s 196 and s 196A — Pleading and relief: distinction between s 85 and s 175 remedies.
|
27 May 2025 |
|
Court set aside Supreme Court judgment and remitted matter due to unresolved Rule 29 rescission and jurisdictional uncertainty.
Constitutional jurisdiction; Rule 29 High Court Rules (rescission/correction) initiated mero motu; finality and validity of appellate judgment; necessity to conclude and communicate court-initiated rescission; remittal for fresh hearing under s 19 Constitutional Court Act
|
15 May 2025 |
|
Direct access refused where applicant’s complaints were factual or unraised, and no constitutional rights were breached.
Constitutional Court — direct access (s 167(5), Rule 21) — interests of justice; appellate deference to trial factual findings; presumption of innocence; assessment of forensic/ballistic evidence not ordinarily a constitutional issue; Practice Direction 3 of 2013 — defective grounds of appeal; sentencing — s 70(1)(n) benefit of lesser penalty where law changes.
|
6 May 2025 |
| March 2025 |
|
|
|
26 March 2025 |
| September 2024 |
|
|
|
17 September 2024 |
| June 2024 |
|
|
|
26 June 2024 |
|
|
24 June 2024 |
|
Court set aside appellate order for failing to determine an extant appeal, finding denial of the right to be heard.
Civil procedure – composite judgment – appeal against whole judgment includes all orders – severability of orders; Constitutional rights – right to be heard and fair hearing (s69) – denial by failure to determine extant appeal; Constitutional Court review powers – s19 used to correct patent procedural irregularity instead of direct s85 application
|
18 June 2024 |
|
Whether land proclaimed urban can be acquired under s16B and whether courts may review such purported acquisitions.
Constitutional law — Land acquisition — s 16B (former Constitution) / s 72 (current Constitution) — agricultural land vs urban land — ouster of jurisdiction — judicial review of unlawful acquisitions — upliftment of caveats
|
11 June 2024 |
| March 2024 |
|
|
|
25 March 2024 |
| February 2024 |
|
|
Applicant sought direct access to challenge Supreme Court handling of a reinstated appeal; Court refused—no constitutional issue.
Constitutional Court — Direct access; finality of Supreme Court decisions on non-constitutional matters; reinstatement and set down of appeals; registrar's duties; correction of erroneous orders; disguised appeal
|
12 February 2024 |
|
High Court declaration invalidating s314 not confirmed; s314 upheld as capable of constitutional construction subject to judicial review.
Constitutional jurisdiction – High Court’s power to entertain direct challenges to legislation; Devolution – scope of ministerial oversight under Chapter 14; Justiciability and ripeness – requirement of a live controversy; Presumption of constitutionality and saving interpretation; Administrative review – decisions subject to judicial control/Administrative Justice Act
|
6 February 2024 |
| January 2024 |
|
|
|
17 January 2024 |
|
Direct access refused where employment inquiry did not raise a constitutional matter and claim for damages belonged in lower courts.
Direct access — extraordinary remedy — must disclose prima facie constitutional matter and be in interests of justice; employer internal inquiry — not a criminal trial; subsidiarity and constitutional avoidance; damages claim properly pursued in ordinary courts; discretion as to costs for self-acting litigant
|
15 January 2024 |
|
Direct access refused: employer inquiry was non-criminal and the matter is not a constitutional dispute for the Constitutional Court.
Direct access – extraordinary remedy; Constitutional jurisdiction – matter must involve interpretation, protection or enforcement of Constitution; Subsidiarity and constitutional avoidance – leave ordinary courts to decide constitutional issues at first instance; Employer disciplinary inquiry not a criminal trial; Self-represented litigant – courts accommodate procedural shortcomings; Costs – no punitive order given applicant’s self-representation
|
15 January 2024 |
| November 2023 |
|
|
Referral on constitutionality of Police Act s70 struck off because prescription not pleaded and presiding judge's death rendered proceedings abortive.
Constitutional referral — s175(4) — Police Act s70 (eight-month prescription) — prescription must be specially pleaded and proved — Prescription Act interaction — constitutional question must arise in subordinate proceedings — death of presiding judge renders part-heard proceedings abortive — referral struck off roll
|
20 November 2023 |
| October 2023 |
|
|
Parliament, through its Parliamentary Legal Committee, must diligently examine and report on every statutory instrument under s152(3)(c).
Constitutional law – s 152(3)(c) – Parliamentary Legal Committee duty to examine and report on every statutory instrument – committee obligations attributable to Parliament – sub judice rule and Standing Orders subordinate to constitutional obligations – mandamus to compel parliamentary compliance
|
20 October 2023 |
| July 2023 |
|
|
|
26 July 2023 |
|
|
25 July 2023 |
| June 2023 |
|
|
|
26 June 2023 |
|
|
26 June 2023 |
|
High Court may, in exceptional cases, order execution pending appeal; direct-access challenge dismissed for lack of prospects and alternative remedies.
Constitutional law; inherent jurisdiction of superior courts (s 176); execution pending appeal; stay of execution; access to courts (s 69); equality (s 56); frivolous/vexatious and direct access
|
15 June 2023 |
| May 2023 |
|
|
|
30 May 2023 |
|
|
30 May 2023 |
|
The applicant was admitted as amicus curiae to assist on constitutional electoral delimitation and election-timing issues, on limited terms.
Constitutional procedure – Amicus curiae – Rule 10(3)–(4) of the Constitutional Court Rules – Interests of justice as paramount – Distinction between joinder/intervention and amicus – Expertise and public importance – Limits on amicus (no positive relief, no costs ordinarily)
|
4 May 2023 |
| April 2023 |
|
|
|
28 April 2023 |
|
Communal land tenure governed by statute; vesting and excision provisions of the Communal Land Act are constitutional.
Communal land – Communal Land Act ss 4 & 6(1)(b) – Property rights s 71 read with s 72 – Occupation rights under ss 8 and 9 – Vesting of communal land in President – Excision to State land lawful – Equality and dignity claims not established
|
27 April 2023 |
|
Applicant failed to show the Bill lapsed on dissolution; earlier remedial order was final and application dismissed with costs.
Constitutional law — lapsing of bills on dissolution (s147) — remedial powers and limiting retrospective effect (s175(6)(b)) — finality of Constitutional Court decisions — competence of relief under s167(2)(d) — equal protection claim (s56(1)) — role of amicus curiae
|
27 April 2023 |
| March 2023 |
|
|
|
20 March 2023 |
| January 2023 |
|
|
|
28 January 2023 |
| July 2022 |
|
|
An application for condonation premised on the wrong rule and lacking the impugned judgment was struck off the roll.
Constitutional Court procedure – condonation – Rule 5 versus Rule 35 – requirement to attach impugned judgment – procedural compliance – striking application off the roll.
|
29 July 2022 |
|
s175(4) requires referral of constitutional issues arising during proceedings; s85(1) access to other courts is ousted and such applications are nullities.
Constitutional law — jurisdiction — s85(1) right of access to courts — s175(4) procedure where constitutional questions arise during pending proceedings — Chihava precedent — High Court jurisdiction ousted; approaches under s85(1) while party is before another court are nullities
|
22 July 2022 |
|
Condonation denied where delay inordinate, applicant not candid and no constitutional matter established for appeal.
Condonation; extension of time; Constitutional Court jurisdiction; requirement of a constitutional matter in subordinate court decision; inordinate delay; lack of candour; matrimonial property; equality references insufficient.
|
8 July 2022 |
| June 2022 |
|
|
Constitutional Court lacks jurisdiction to stay ongoing lower-court criminal proceedings pending determination of direct-access applications.
Constitutional Court jurisdiction – review powers under s 19 – application for direct access is procedural not substantive – staying unterminated lower-court proceedings – reluctance to interfere absent constitutional matter.
|
10 June 2022 |
| May 2022 |
|
|
|
24 May 2022 |
| March 2022 |
|
|
Direct access for rescission denied: procedural non-compliance, delay and lack of lawful authority/standing.
Constitutional Court — direct access — requirements for leave — procedural compliance with court rules (r21, r29) — s 24 Constitutional Court Act (substantive power) vs procedural rules (s26) — rescission of judgments — locus standi to rescind — lawful authority to occupy gazetted land (offer letter, permit, lease).
|
22 March 2022 |
|
Application for recusal dismissed: prior preliminary rulings do not, by themselves, establish reasonable apprehension of bias.
Recusal — apprehension of bias — objective test — prior judicial rulings on preliminary issues do not disqualify judge from later hearing merits; distinction between procedural preliminary findings and merits; standing and security for costs for foreign corporate applicants.
|
9 March 2022 |
| December 2021 |
|
|
Direct access refused as challenge to marriage definition is premature while Parliament considers remedial legislation.
Constitutional law – Direct access – Rule 21 and s167(5) – Doctrine of avoidance and ripeness – Separation of powers – Recognition of unregistered customary marriages – Matrimonial Causes Act s2.
|
9 December 2021 |
| November 2021 |
|
|
Applicants required leave to bring an r449 rescission to the Constitutional Court; application struck off for non‑compliance.
Constitutional Court — direct access and leave — r 449 High Court Rules (imported by r 45) — s 167(5) and s 176 — distinction between jurisdiction and access — gate‑keeping function of leave — r 21 exceptions for incidental procedural applications — rescission applications introducing new facts and parties require leave.
|
3 November 2021 |
| October 2021 |
|
|
Whether s 182(2) Electoral Act time limit ousts jurisdiction and whether that raises a constitutional access-to-courts issue.
Constitutional jurisdiction – limited to constitutional matters – statutory interpretation not per se constitutional; Electoral Act s 182(2) – three‑month time limit mandatory and peremptory – failure to prosecute timeously ousts jurisdiction; access to courts – alleged limitation not established.
|
5 October 2021 |
|
Direct access refused: s 65(2) protects only lawful union activities and does not immunise representatives from disciplinary action.
Constitutional law — direct access to Constitutional Court — trade union rights s 65(2) — lawful activities only — employment contract and disciplinary codes (s 101 Labour Act) — no immunity for union representatives — disguised appeal against Supreme Court decision.
|
5 October 2021 |
| September 2021 |
|
|
Constitutional Court set aside High Court’s invalidation of judicial tenure-extension, holding age-limits are not term-limits under s328(7).
Constitutional law – confirmation proceedings under s 175 – standing of "any person with a sufficient interest" – High Court orders of constitutional invalidity – interpretation of s 186 (judicial tenure) vis-à-vis s 328(7) (term-limit amendment) – Rule 18 leave to sue judges – recusal and presumption of judicial impartiality.
|
22 September 2021 |
| July 2021 |
|
|
Direct access to challenge an interlocutory stay of execution was dismissed as not being in the interests of justice.
Constitutional law — direct access (s 167(5)) — Constitutional Court Rules r 21 — interlocutory orders — stay of execution — interests of justice — prospects of success — exhaustion of domestic remedies.
|
13 July 2021 |
|
Applicant's leave to appeal dismissed: no constitutional matter was decided below, so the Constitutional Court lacks jurisdiction.
Constitutional Court jurisdiction — appeals under Rule 32(2) only from subordinate court decisions on constitutional matters; no constitutional issue where dispute concerns constructive dismissal; allegations that a judgment violates fundamental rights must be prosecuted by direct application under s85(1); finality of Supreme Court non-constitutional decisions.
|
13 July 2021 |
| May 2021 |
|
|
Direct access improperly sought; magistrates' failures to advise on right to legal representation were gross irregularities.
Constitutional procedure – Direct access – s167(5)(a) read with s85(1) and Constitutional Court Rules (r21) – mandatory procedural requirements for direct access; Criminal procedure – ss163A and 191 CP&E Act – duty to advise accused of right to legal representation and to ascertain understanding; Jurisdiction – constitutional avoidance and subsidiarity; Remedy – referral to Judge President/High Court for review.
|
17 May 2021 |