Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Malawi decisions
Source-linked decisions currently available to browse
The High Court dismissed a without notice application for an interlocutory injunction stopping announcement of Lilongwe Mpenu parliamentary results, citing the election complaint process and procedural requirements.
The High Court dismissed a without notice application for interlocutory injunction in an election cause, holding that election injunctions must be made inter partes.
Kazombo v Malawi Electoral Commission (Judicial Review Cause 61 of 2025) [2025] MWHCCiv 13 (22 September 2025)
Leave to seek judicial review was refused because the application papers contained procedural errors, unclear arguments, and drafting irregularities.
The High Court of Malawi dismissed an application for leave to commence judicial review after finding drafting errors, unclear arguments and incorrect citations in the papers.
Ndhlovu v Malawi Electoral Commission (Electoral Case 1 of 2025) [2025] MWHC 22 (10 September 2025)
The High Court dismissed an election application challenging exclusion from a parliamentary candidate list because it was commenced by the wrong procedure.
Sandram v Malawi Electoral Commission (Electoral Case 5 of 2025) [2025] MWHC 23 (9 September 2025)
The exclusion of the Claimant from the list of parliamentary candidates was unlawful because the Returning Officer failed to notify him of the defect in his nomination papers (ineligibility for youth fee) before the close of the nomination period, depriving him of the opportunity to rectify the defect or utilize internal complaint mechanisms. The Claimant was not eligible for the youth fee at the time of nomination, but the procedural failure by the Defendant rendered the exclusion unlawful.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that Sandram was not entitled to the youth nomination fee, but the Returning Officer’s failure to notify him of the defect made the exclusion unlawful.
The High Court held that Daniel Binda’s nomination rejection was unlawful because MEC failed to timely notify him of the defect and allow correction before close of nominations.
The High Court dismissed an electoral petition seeking approval of candidature under the maiden surname “Fatch”, holding that voter-registration details had to remain as recorded.
The High Court upheld leave for judicial review in an election dispute, dismissed an application to end proceedings early, and held one supporting sworn statement a nullity.
Explore more
