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
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court of Malawi found the claimant’s arrest, prosecution and detention were instigated by the defendant, awarding ordinary damages for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment.
Banda v Malawi Post Corporation (Personal Injury Cause 138 of 2020) [2024] MWHC 22 (19 March 2024)
The High Court of Malawi dismissed claims for false imprisonment, defamation, malicious prosecution, and conversion of money, but upheld conversion of listed office items.
Nkhoma v First Merchant Bank (Civil Cause 41 of 2016) [2023] MWHC 119 (9 August 2023)
The Defendant merely reported the loss to the police, who acted independently in arresting and prosecuting the Claimant; thus, the claim for false imprisonment and defamation fails. However, the Defendant, through its lawyers, obtained consent to prosecute but failed to proceed, indicating lack of reasonable and probable cause, and thus the claim for malicious prosecution succeeds. The claim for reimbursement of legal fees fails for lack of evidence.
Source excerpt
The High Court of Malawi held that the Claimants were falsely imprisoned and maliciously prosecuted, but dismissed special damages for lack of strict proof.
Phiri and 2 Others v Attorney General (Civil Cause 489 of 2016) [2023] MWHC 106 (20 July 2023)
The Defendant had no reasonable and probable cause to arrest or prosecute the Claimants, as the evidence did not show the Claimants incited violence and key evidence against them was hearsay and inadmissible. The prosecution was triggered by the Claimants' demand for compensation, indicating malice. Special damages were not strictly proved and thus not awarded. Claimants are entitled to damages for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, and costs.
Source excerpt
Mwanyali v National Bank of Malawi PLC (Civil Cause 385 of 2020) [2022] MWHCCiv 12 (16 September 2022)
The High Court of Malawi dismissed a claim for false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and defamation, finding the bank only reported facts and did not instigate the arrest.
Osman v Attorney General (Personal Injury Cause 831 of 2017) [2022] MWHC 135 (4 August 2022)
Claimant proved false imprisonment for 10 days, loss of business, and defamation; no evidence supported malicious prosecution or exemplary damages. Damages awarded based on comparable cases, duration, and circumstances. Costs awarded as case was straightforward and liability settled by default judgment.
Source excerpt
Majeweta and 8 Others v Attorney General (Civil Cause 142 of 2020) [2022] MWHC 78 (20 May 2022)
Assessment of damages after default judgment for unlawful arrest and related torts. The High Court awarded all nine claimants damages and costs.
Raymond Alfred & 2 others v The Attorney General (Malawi Police Service) (Civil Cause 875 of 2017) [2022] MWHCCiv 17 (4 April 2022)
Claimants were incarcerated for 64 days and prosecuted without sufficient evidence, resulting in loss of liberty, reputation, and mental suffering. Comparable case law and currency devaluation were considered in quantifying damages. Each claimant is awarded MK500,000 for mental feelings, reputation, humiliation and anguish; MK2,500,000 for loss of liberty; and MK2,100,000 for malicious prosecution.
Source excerpt
Chigalu and 4 Others v Attorney General (Civil Cause 114 of 2013) [2022] MWHC 38 (1 April 2022)
The action is dismissed because the Claimants sued the wrong party. The Anti-Corruption Bureau, not the Attorney General, is the proper party to be sued for acts arising from its functions. The court cannot assist litigants in amending parties at this stage, and the proceedings are unsustainable in law.
Source excerpt
Explore more
