Judgment No. CCZ 10/14 11 Constitutional Application No. SC 226/10 (e) has no lawful authority to occupy or use that land. The applicant also submitted that the State had to disprove the applicant’s defence of a mistake of law. I will deal with each essential element in turn - Is The Applicant A Former Owner Or Occupier? The evidence or facts placed before the trial court clearly establish that the applicant carried out farming operations on the farm in question before and after the farm was acquired in terms of s 16B of the Constitution. That evidence is clearly credible and is corroborated by the annexures attached to the applicant’s defence outline. The evidence before the court a quo clearly establishes prima facie, at the very least, that the applicant is a former occupier of the farm. Is the Farm Gazetted Land? The evidence that the farm was acquired in terms of s 16B of the Constitution admits of no debate. The Government Gazette Extraordinary dated 22 February 2002, attached to the applicant’s Defence Outline, clearly shows that the farm is one of those farms acquired by the State in terms of Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 17) Act, 2005, which came into effect on 28 December 2006. Accordingly, the farm is indeed gazetted land and the evidence to that effect is beyond dispute. The submission that the acquisition is unlawful because it was declared unlawful by the SADC Tribunal flies in the face of this Court’s decision in Commercial Farmers’ Union and Ors v Minister of Lands and Rural Resettlement and Ors SC 31/10. comment. It is a mischievous submission not worthy of any further