Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (Number 20) Act, 2013
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether Statutory Instrument 122 of 2013 setting licence fees at US$5.5 million is ultra vires the parent Act on grounds of unreasonableness","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Fee amount, 14-year coverage period, consultation process"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the 1st respondent failed to comply with statutory obligations under s 5 (5) of S.I. 262 of 2001 to publish licences in the Gazette","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Ministerial order issued 30 June 2016, no publication occurred"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the 1st respondent must enforce s 37 (5) of the Act regarding publication of licences by licensees","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Gap in enforcement mechanisms"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Telecontract challenged the US$5.5 million Class "A" Internet Access Provider licence fee set by Statutory Instrument 122 of 2013, arguing it was ultra vires and unreasonable. The application was initially dismissed on procedural grounds but the Supreme Court remitted it for merits determination.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases