section 69(4) Constitutioncosts awardconstitutional avoidanceright to legal representation
Tags
constitutional challengecosts orderaccess to legal representation
legislation
Statutes Cited
Constitution of Zimbabwe
Constitution of Zimbabwe
Constitution of Zimbabwe
Constitution of Zimbabwe
High Court Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the Constitutional Court has jurisdiction to hear a direct constitutional challenge to a costs award when alternative remedies were available","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Applicant did not appeal to Supreme Court; constitutional issue not raised in court a quo"}
{"issue_text":"Whether a costs award infringes the right to legal representation under section 69(4) of the Constitution","issue_type":"constitutional","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Costs awarded against applicant who represented himself"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant challenged a costs award made against him in the High Court, claiming it infringed his constitutional right to legal representation under section 69(4) of the Constitution. He approached the Constitutional Court directly without exhausting appeal remedies.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases