Zambia, Attorney General v Meer Care & Desai (A Firm) & Ors

Zambia, Attorney General v Meer Care & Desai (A Firm) & Ors

The objections raised by the 2nd and 8th Defendants to the re-amended Particulars of Claim are not sustainable except for the issue of knowing receipt, which may be revisited after close of pleadings. The pleadings, though complex, are adequate given the nature of the case. The applications to strike out and for summary judgment are rejected, and permission to re-amend is granted.

Parties
Claimant: The Attorney General of Zambia for and on behalf of the Republic of Zambia; 1st Defendant: Meer Care & Desai (A firm); 2nd Defendant: Cave Malik; 8th Defendant: Bimal Thaker; 3rd Defendant: Dr Chiluba; Defendants: Other Defendants (6th, 7th, 9th, 11th)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment; Permission to Re Amend Pleadings
Outcome
Applications to strike out and for summary judgment dismissed; permission to re-amend pleadings granted.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Summary Judgment, Pleadings, Fraudulent Misappropriation, Money Laundering
Civil Procedure Fraud Conspiracy Strike Out Applications Summary Judgment Pleadings Fraudulent Misappropriation Money Laundering

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Attorney General of Zambia for and on behalf of the Republic of Zambia

Claimant

Meer Care & Desai (A firm)

1st Defendant

Cave Malik

2nd Defendant

Bimal Thaker

8th Defendant

Dr Chiluba

3rd Defendant

Other Defendants (6th, 7th, 9th, 11th)

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Application to Strike Out And/or for Summary Judgment; Permission to Re Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim against the 2nd and 8th Defendants should be struck out as an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether summary judgment should be granted
  3. 3 Adequacy and clarity of pleadings in allegations of fraud and conspiracy

Ratio Decidendi

The objections raised by the 2nd and 8th Defendants to the re-amended Particulars of Claim are not sustainable except for the issue of knowing receipt, which may be revisited after close of pleadings. The pleadings, though complex, are adequate given the nature of the case. The applications to strike out and for summary judgment are rejected, and permission to re-amend is granted.

Court Disposition

Applications to strike out and for summary judgment dismissed; permission to re-amend pleadings granted.

Orders

  • Written submissions to be considered for timetable to plead to new pleading.
  • Written submissions on costs to be considered; provisional view is costs in the case.