Mufalo v Nganga (S.C.Z. Judgment 24 of 1988) [1988] ZMSC 34 (17 August 1988)

Mufalo v Nganga (S.C.Z. Judgment 24 of 1988) [1988] ZMSC 34 (17 August 1988)

There is nothing to prevent parties entering into contracts for the sale of land conditionally upon the obtaining of Presidential consent under section 13(1) of the Land (Conversion of Titles) Act. The action should not have been dismissed as frivolous and vexatious.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1988] ZMSC 34
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Regina Mufalo; Respondent/defendant: Hellas Inonge Nganga
Court
Supreme Court of Zambia
Jurisdiction
Zambia
Case Number
S.C.Z. Judgment 24 of 1988
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision Upholding Deputy Registrar's Dismissal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Presidential Consent for Sale of Land, Specific Performance, Summary Judgment, Frivolous and Vexatious Actions
Source Language
en
Land Law Contract Law Presidential Consent for Sale of Land Specific Performance Summary Judgment Frivolous and Vexatious Actions

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina Mufalo

Appellant/plaintiff

Hellas Inonge Nganga

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Decision Upholding Deputy Registrar's Dismissal

  1. 1 Whether parties can enter into a contract for sale of land before obtaining Presidential consent under the Land (Conversion of Titles) Act, s.13(1)
  2. 2 Whether the action was frivolous and vexatious and properly dismissed

Ratio Decidendi

There is nothing to prevent parties entering into contracts for the sale of land conditionally upon the obtaining of Presidential consent under section 13(1) of the Land (Conversion of Titles) Act. The action should not have been dismissed as frivolous and vexatious.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order by Deputy Registrar dismissing the action set aside
  • Action sent back for proceedings to continue in the High Court