Judgment No. CCZ 7/2014 12 Const. Application No. 41/2014 The legal consequences of a decision by the Constitutional Court that a law, a regulation or some of their provisions, are unconstitutional are that they lose their legal force on the day of the publication of the Constitutional Court decision. Until then, the law, regulation or any provision has legal force. An impression should not be created in the minds of right thinking members of the public that the outcome of the hearing by the Constitutional Court of the question of constitutionality of legislation has been pre-determined. Sections 36 of the VAT Act and 69(1) of the Income Tax Act are laws of general application. Although the applicant framed the interim order on the belief that it would affect its immediate interests only, the truth of it is that the relief cannot be granted without bringing into question the efficacy of the whole revenue collection system. The interim order would be suspending the operation of the statutory provisions for all taxpayers who are under the same continuing obligation to pay the assessed tax liability as the applicant. All such taxpayers would obtain relief from the statutory obligation premised on the presumed constitutional invalidity of the legislation contrary to s 167(3) of the Constitution. The section makes it clear that only the Constitutional Court has the power to make the final decision whether an Act of Parliament is constitutional. The order would create uncertainty and confusion about the status of the provisions of the Acts of Parliament. In MEC Development Planning & Local Govt. v Democratic Party 1998(4)SA 1157 at para. 61 the Constitutional Court of South Africa on a similar issue said: “It is sufficient to point out here that considerable difficulties stand in the way of the adoption of a procedure which allows a party to obtain relief which is in effect