TWENTY THIRD CENTURY (PRIVATE) LIMITED v ZIMBABWE MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT FUND and PROCUREMENT REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF ZIMBABWE and TANO DIGITAL SOLUTIONS (PRIVATE) LIMITED
Public ProcurementJudicial ReviewAdministrative Law
legislation
Statutes Cited
Administrative Justice Act
Administrative Justice Act
Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act
Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act
Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act
Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act
Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act
Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act
Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act
Manpower Planning and Development Act
Manpower Planning and Development Act 1984
Manpower Planning and Development Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether the Review Panel was properly constituted in terms of section 75(4) of the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Composition of the Review Panel; Appointment of members"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the 2nd respondent complied with the mandatory requirement to advertise for panelists under section 75(2)(b)","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Absence of advertisements"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the decision of the Review Panel is a nullity due to lack of jurisdiction","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Improper constitution of the panel"}
{"issue_text":"Whether this court has jurisdiction to hear the application despite the existence of alternative remedies under section 77","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Applicant approached High Court directly"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant challenged a tender award for SAP software services, arguing that the tender process was flawed and that the review panel was improperly constituted. The court found that the review panel did not comply with statutory requirements for its composition, making its decision a nullity.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases