Zulu v Kwane and SP Mulenga Investments Limited (HP 279 of 2009) [2014] ZMHC 86 (22 July 2014)
The application to review was declined because the statement of claim raises specific allegations against the 2nd Defendant, which must be proved at trial, and there was no sufficient basis to review the earlier ruling.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] ZMHC 86
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Weluzani Zulu; 1st Defendant: G Martin Kwane; 2nd Defendant: SP Mulenga Investments Limited
- Court
- High Court of Zambia
- Jurisdiction
- Zambia
- Case Number
- HP 279 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Ruling on Application for Special Leave to Review and for Misjoinder
- Outcome
- Application declined; leave to appeal granted.
- Legal Topics
- Review of Ruling, Misjoinder of Parties, Leave to Appeal
- 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
Weluzani Zulu
Plaintiff
G Martin Kwane
1st Defendant
SP Mulenga Investments Limited
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application for Special Leave to Review and for Misjoinder
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should grant special leave to review its earlier ruling
- 2 Whether there was misjoinder of the 2nd Defendant
Ratio Decidendi
The application to review was declined because the statement of claim raises specific allegations against the 2nd Defendant, which must be proved at trial, and there was no sufficient basis to review the earlier ruling.
Court Disposition
Application declined; leave to appeal granted.
Orders
- Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court is granted.
- Costs be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR ZAMBIA AT THE PRINCIPAL REGISTRY (Civil J u risd ictio n ) 2 0 0 9 /H P / 0 2 7 9 BETWEEN: WELUZANI ZULU AND PLAINTIFF G MARTIN KWANE SP MULENGA INVESTMENTS LIMITED 1ST DEFENDANT 2 nd DEFENDANT B efore th e H on. Mr. J u s tic e D. Y. S ich in g a , SC in C ham bers at Lusaka on th e 2 3 rd day o f J u ly , 2 0 1 4 For th e P la in tiff : Legal Aid Board For th e 1st D efen d a n ts : M essrs C. K. M. & A sso c ia te s For th e 2 nd D efen d an ts: M essrs Kangwa K apita A d v o ca tes R U L I N G This is the 2nd D efendant’s application for special leave to review Ruling dated 7th January, 2014 and for an Order for Misjoinder o f party to proceedings. The application is supported by an affidavit filed on the 17th March 2014 and opposed to by an affidavit filed on 30lh April 2014. R1 The gist o f the affidavit in support is that this court did not consider the 2nd Defendant’s affidavit in opposition termed as an “Affidavit in reply to the affidavit in support o f summons fo r non-joinder ofparties” . The gist of the affidavit in support is that the 2nd Defendant was not a party to the transaction between the Plaintiff and first Defendant, and that the Plaintiff did not show the 2nd Defendant’s interest in the matter. I have considered the said affidavit filed on the 6 January 2014 together with the t h • affidavit in support and opposition to this application. The statement o f claim raises specific allegations as regards the 2nd Defendant which it must prove at trial on a balance o f probabilities. I am thus inclined to decline the application to review my Ruling o f the 7th January 2014. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court is granted. Costs be in the cause. Matter is now sent to the Judge-in-charge for reallocation. R2