Judgment No. CCZ 10 /2015 9 Const. Application No. 8/2014 With regard to an appeal, the applicant correctly conceded that, on the face of it, the issues that he sought this Court to determine were also not brought before it as an appeal against the decision of the Supreme Court. However, because he sought to impugn a decision of that court, it is pertinent to quote s 169 of the Constitution, which reads as follows:“169 Jurisdiction of Supreme Court (1) The Supreme Court is the final court of appeal for Zimbabwe, except in matters over which the Constitutional Court has jurisdiction.”(my emphasis) My reading of s 169(1) suggests that while the Supreme Court can make a decision on a constitutional matter, such decision is not final, since only the Constitutional Court can make a final decision on that matter in terms of s 167(1)(a. In other words, an appeal lies to the Constitutional Court against an order of the Supreme Court, only on a constitutional matter determined by it. Another type of appeal to the Constitutional Court could be one in terms of s 175(3). This is a position that this Court confirmed in its recent decision in the case of Don Nyamande & Anor v Zuva Petroleum (CCZ 8\15). ZIYAMBI CCJ stated as follows; “In my view, such a right (of appeal) may be read into s 175(3) of the Constitution which applies where an order of constitutional invalidity of any law has been made by a court. Failing that, a right of appeal could only arise where the Supreme Court makes a decision on a constitutional matter. Since no constitutional case was determined by the Supreme Court, no appeal can lie against its decision.” In that case, the applicants who had not raised a constitutional issue before the Supreme Court sought leave to appeal against its decision, purportedly (and erroneously) in terms of s 167(5) of the constitution. The application was dismissed with the court correctly holding as follows:“Section 167(5 relates to rules of procedure regulating the manner of approach to this Court on appeal from lower courts. It does not confer a right to appeal to the Constitutional Court on a litigant who has no right of appeal” (my emphasis).