Nineteen Eleven Ventures v Minister of Finance & Economic Department and Others

The appellant purchased a motor vehicle from Japan through the third respondent on 27 September 2018. The first respondent introduced Statutory Instrument 252A of 2018, which required importers to pay duty for certain designated goods in foreign currency from 3 January 2019. The appellant's motor vehicle was not shipped before the deadline because it had to await the filling of the container, and was therefore imported after 3 January 2019. The first respondent refused to grant the appellant an exemption. The appellant applied to the High Court seeking an order declaring section 3(3) of SI 252A/18 to be grossly irrational and unreasonable and in contravention of section 68(1) of the Constitution, or alternatively declaring that the provision contravened section 71(2) of the Constitution.

• Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal concerning the constitutional validity or invalidity of a statute
• Whether section 3(3) of Statutory Instrument 252A/18 is grossly irrational and unreasonable and in contravention of section 68(1) of the Constitution
• Whether section 3(3) of SI 252A/18 contravenes section 71(2) of the Constitution

The matter was struck off the roll with costs.

The Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal on the constitutional validity or invalidity of a statute. Where both the main and alternative relief sought involve a declaration of constitutional invalidity, the Supreme Court must decline jurisdiction and strike the matter off the roll.

No significant obiter dicta were made in this judgment. The Court's decision was brief and focused solely on the jurisdictional issue without commenting on the merits of the constitutional challenge or any other matters beyond what was necessary for the determination of jurisdiction.

This case is significant in Zimbabwean jurisprudence as it confirms and applies the principle established in Mfundo Mlilo v The Republic of Zimbabwe SC 179/20 that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear appeals concerning the constitutional validity or invalidity of statutes. It reinforces the jurisdictional boundaries of the Supreme Court in constitutional matters and emphasizes the importance of proper forum selection for constitutional challenges.