Abstract

This note analyses the Constitutional Court’s approach to its jurisdiction over the misapplication of settled common-law legal tests. The note criticises the court’s approach in recent cases as being unnecessarily circumscribed and argues that the outcome of the Olesitse case is commendable as it best ensures the maximum protection of constitutional rights and a coherent and harmonious development of our legal system in line with constitutional dictates. The note nevertheless criticises the court for adopting an ambivalent approach that sought to draw an overly fine distinction between a misapplication of the law and an error of law.