Government of the Republic of Zimbabwe v Fick and Others

The dispute arose from Zimbabwe’s land reform programme, entrenched in s 16B of its Constitution, under which agricultural land was compulsorily acquired without compensation (save for improvements) and domestic court challenges were barred. Several dispossessed farmers, including the respondents, approached the SADC Tribunal, which ruled in their favour in November 2008 and later found Zimbabwe in contempt for non-compliance, ordering it to pay costs. Zimbabwe refused to comply. The respondents then applied to the North Gauteng High Court for recognition and enforcement of the Tribunal’s costs order. Service was effected by edictal citation. Zimbabwe initially noted an intention to oppose but withdrew, and a default order was granted recognising and enforcing the Tribunal’s rulings. Zimbabwe later sought rescission of the orders authorising service and recognising the Tribunal’s decisions, raising defences of sovereign immunity, improper service, and lack of Tribunal jurisdiction. The High Court dismissed these applications, and Zimbabwe appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel. The High Court orders recognising and enforcing the SADC Tribunal’s rulings remained in force.

This case is a leading South African authority on the domestic enforceability of decisions of international tribunals, particularly the SADC Tribunal. It affirms that member states which accede to international treaties and tribunals may waive sovereign immunity and submit to enforcement proceedings in South African courts. The judgment underscores South Africa’s commitment to the rule of law, international obligations, and access to justice beyond domestic constitutional barriers.