Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Devagi Rattigan and Others v. Chief Immigration Officer and Others was a case centered upon whether an immigration law that refused permanent residence to alien husbands of female Zimbabwean citizens violated those particular citizens' right to the freedom of movement in Zimbabwe's Constitution. [5]
In one of its first cases, Mike Campbell (Pvt) Ltd and Others v Republic of Zimbabwe [4] the Tribunal decided in 2007 and 2008 that the government of Zimbabwe may not evict farmer Mike Campbell from his land, and that farm evictions per Amendment 17 of Zimbabwe's constitution amount to de facto discrimination against Whites.
Mike Campbell (Pvt) Ltd et al. v. Republic of Zimbabwe [1] is a case decided by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Tribunal (hereinafter "the Tribunal"). The Tribunal held that the Zimbabwean government violated the organisation's treaty by denying access to the courts and engaging in racial discrimination against white farmers whose lands had been confiscated under the land ...
In the case of state agencies, administrative courts may rule on the actual content of the decision. The United States does not have a separate system of administrative courts in the judicial branch. [2] Instead, administrative law judges (ALJs) preside over tribunals within executive branch agencies.
A legal remedy, also referred to as judicial relief or a judicial remedy, is the means with which a court of law, usually in the exercise of civil law jurisdiction, enforces a right, imposes a penalty, or makes another court order to impose its will in order to compensate for the harm of a wrongful act inflicted upon an individual. [1]
Since the defeat of the constitutional referendum in 2000, politics in Zimbabwe has been marked by a move from the norms of democratic governance, such as democratic elections, the independence of the judiciary, the rule of law, freedom from racial discrimination, the existence of independent media, civil society and academia. [5]
The Constitution of Zimbabwe is the supreme law of Zimbabwe. The independence constitution of 1980 was the result of the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement and is sometimes called the Lancaster Constitution. [1] A proposed constitution, drafted by a constitutional convention, was defeated by a constitutional referendum during 2000.
For the Rhodesian justices, the appointment date indicates the date they were appointed to the High Court of Rhodesia, which was superseded by the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe. The start date of the Rhodesian justices' tenure, however, is 18 April 1980, the date that the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe came into being.