Back to top
Zalari has raised $2 million USD in a founding round led by Nyamaropa Technologies
Supreme Court

The Commander Defence Forces v Collen Chiba & 5 Ors

SC 48/24

Case Details

Court
Supreme Court
Date
31 May 2024
Citation
SC 48/24
Neutral Citation
[2024] ZWSC 48
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Appeal

Bench

Presiding
Mavangira JA
Author
Kudya JA
Full Bench
Mavangira JAKudya JAMusakwa JA
Areas of Law
Administrative lawMilitary lawConstitutional law
Keywords
Audi alteram partemBoard of SuitabilityDischarge from armyProcedural irregularitiesRight to be heard
Tags
Military lawAdministrative justiceNatural justiceReview application
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • Immigration Act 1971
  • Immigration Act 1988
  • Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993
  • Asylum and Immigration Act 1996
  • European Convention on Human Rights
  • Human Rights Act 1998
  • Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
  • Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
  • Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997
  • Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
  • Extradition Act 1989
  • Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
  • Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
  • Magistrates' Courts Act 1980
  • Supreme Court Act 1981
  • Civil Procedure Rules 1998
  • Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992
  • Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007
  • Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012
  • Legal Services Act 2007
  • Access to Justice Act 1999
  • Courts and Legal Services Act 1990
  • Constitutional Reform Act 2005
  • Inquiries Act 2005
  • Freedom of Information Act 2000
  • Data Protection Act 1998
  • Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
  • Terrorism Act 2000
  • Terrorism Act 2006
  • Counter-Terrorism Act 2008
  • Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005
  • Protection of Freedoms Act 2012
  • Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009
  • UK Borders Act 2007
  • Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006
  • Nationality and Borders Act 2022
  • Illegal Migration Act 2023
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether the court a quo erred in failing to raise mero motu the non-joinder of the army commander","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Citation of appellant instead of army commander"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the court a quo erred in granting the review application","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Procedural irregularities in BOS proceedings, right to be heard"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the order should have included the fourth respondent who had withdrawn","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Fourth respondent's withdrawal before judgment"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

Seven army members were discharged after a Board of Suitability inquiry found them unsuitable to serve, despite having been acquitted by a General Court Martial. The High Court reviewed and set aside their discharge, leading to this appeal.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →