Maneto and 31 Others v Registered Trustees of Mchinji Catholic Church (MSCA Civil Appeal 3 of 2017) [2017] MWSC 7 (24 April 2017)
The application for stay was dismissed as it was found to be procedurally untenable and an abuse of the court process.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] MWSC 7
- Parties
- Applicant: Folomento Maneto & 31 Others; Respondent: The Registered Trustees of Mchinji Catholic Church
- Court
- Malawi Supreme Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Malawi
- Case Number
- MSCA Civil Appeal 3 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Stay of Execution, Abuse of Process, Appeal Procedure
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Folomento Maneto & 31 Others
Applicant
The Registered Trustees of Mchinji Catholic Church
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the application for stay of execution pending appeal was properly before the court
- 2 Whether the application constituted an abuse of court process
Ratio Decidendi
The application for stay was dismissed as it was found to be procedurally untenable and an abuse of the court process.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Orders
- Each party to bear its own costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE MALAWI SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL SITTING AT BLANTYRE MSCA CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2017 [Being High Court, Lilongwe District Registry, Civil Cause Number 791 of 2008] BETWEEN FOLOMENTO MANETO & 31 OTHERS APPLICANT AND THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF MCHINJI CATHOLIC CHURCH _ RESPONDENT CORAM: THE HON. MRGUSTICE L P CHIKOPA'SC JA B Mwenifuimbo Ms. of Counsel for the Applicants. a, | Ottober Ms. of Counsel for the Respondent — Maluwa Mr,. Cour t Clerk ‘ confusion, and that is putting it mildly, attending to this matter. The Respondent suc € ssfully sued the Appellants in the High Court over land. The gravamen of the judgment is that the Appellants should vacate a piece of land the subject of the suit. The judgment is dated May 11', 2016. On June 3th, 2016 the Appellants were granted leave to appeal against the above judgment. They also brought an application seeking to stay execution of the above judgment before the High Court. The same was dismissed by a ruling dated August 26", 2016. On January 3, 2017 the Respondents applied for leave to appeal against the ruling of August 26, 2016. On January 21%*, 2017 the Appellant applied to the Malawi Supreme Court of Appeal for a stay of the judgment of the High Court of May 11", 2017 pending untenable. And as clear enough an abuse of the court process as you will come across. The Appellants should, if we might say so, decide what it is that they want to do about the various orders of the High Court and thereafter proceed in accordance with procedure and the law. The application is accordingly dismissed. On costs we think each party should pay its own fare. The Appellants do not read like the kind that would be in a position to afford the Respondent’s costs. We order accordingly. Dated at Blantyre this of 24" day of April 2017. P. CHIKOPA SC “JUBTICE OF APPEAL