Law Commons^™

Mark Tink And Others V. Lumwana Mining Company Limited Caz Appeal No. 41/2021, Chanda Chungu

SAIPAR Case Review

The decision in Mark Tink and Others v. Lumwana Mining Company Limited is an important decision because it clarifies and restates that law that a valid reason, that is substantiated is required when an employer initiates termination of the contract of employment.

This article critiques the approach of the Court of Appeal as it relates to the award of damages. This article seeks to provide clarity as it relates to the award of damages, particularly the way is granted and justified. It is suggested that when the opportunity arises either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court should revise …

Finance Bank And Rajan Mahtani V Simataa Simataa Scz Appeal No. 11/2017, Chanda Chungu

SAIPAR Case Review

The employer settled an employment dispute with its former employee out of court. They bound their former employee to a settlement agreement that he would not speak badly of the employer or testify against them in future. He subsequently testified against his former employer and the employer sued for a refund of the settlement amount.

The court was of the view that only nominal damages (equivalent to K500) would be awarded merely to show that there had been a breach of the agreement not to testify. However, the amount was limited to a small sum of nominal damages as loss …

Zambia Breweries Plc V. Betternow Family Limited Selected Judgment No. 48 Of 2016, Chanda Chungu

SAIPAR Case Review

This matter dealt with a distributorship contract between Zambia Breweries and Betternow Family Limited. Betternow paid K100, 000 as a pre-condition to trading Zambia Breweries’ products – but after three (3) months of trading, Zambia Breweries terminated the supply of its products to Betternow Family Limited.

In this case, the contract provided that the contract can be terminated with one month’s notice. The contract was cancelled by Zambia Breweries and Betternow Family Limited sued for breach of contract. The trial court awarded damages equivalent to the unserved or remaining period of the contract.

The Supreme Court held that: Any damages …