Lungu v Namukoko and ZCCM Investments Holdings PLC (HK 146 of 2010) [2012] ZMHC 29 (19 April 2012)

Lungu v Namukoko and ZCCM Investments Holdings PLC (HK 146 of 2010) [2012] ZMHC 29 (19 April 2012)

The deceased was not eligible to purchase the house as he was not a ZCCM employee or employee of a qualifying subsidiary, nor had he received an offer to purchase. The 1st Defendant was a direct ZCCM employee and was properly offered and paid for the house in accordance with the rules. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] ZMHC 29
Parties
Plaintiff: Blackson Lungu (Administrator of the estate of Chokani Lungu); 1st Defendant: Priscah Rides Namukoko; 2nd Defendant: ZCCM Investments Holdings PLC
Court
High Court of Zambia
Jurisdiction
Zambia
Case Number
HK 146 of 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's action dismissed; judgment for 1st Defendant on counter-claim.
Legal Topics
Sale of Government/parastatal Houses, Eligibility for Purchase of Company Houses, Rights of Administrators of Estates, Vacant Possession, Damages for Non Use
Source Language
en
Property Law Succession Law Sale of Government/parastatal Houses Eligibility for Purchase of Company Houses Rights of Administrators of Estates Vacant Possession Damages for Non Use

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Blackson Lungu (Administrator of the estate of Chokani Lungu)

Plaintiff

Priscah Rides Namukoko

1st Defendant

ZCCM Investments Holdings PLC

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the deceased or his estate was entitled to purchase the house under the ZCCM house sale scheme
  2. 2 Whether the sale to the 1st Defendant was valid under the applicable rules
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff was entitled to cancellation of the 1st Defendant's title

Ratio Decidendi

The deceased was not eligible to purchase the house as he was not a ZCCM employee or employee of a qualifying subsidiary, nor had he received an offer to purchase. The 1st Defendant was a direct ZCCM employee and was properly offered and paid for the house in accordance with the rules. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim fails and the 1st Defendant is entitled to possession and damages.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's action dismissed; judgment for 1st Defendant on counter-claim.

Orders

  • Whoever is in occupation of the house to give vacant possession to the 1st Defendant within 14 days.
  • 1st Defendant to recover damages for non-use of the house from 3rd December, 2008 until possession is recovered, damages to be assessed by Deputy Registrar.