Law Commons^™

Richard Musenyesa V. Indo Zambia Bank Limited Appeal No. 214/2016 (2020), Chanda Chungu

SAIPAR Case Review

In Richard Musenyesa v. Indo Zambia Bank Limited, the Supreme Court dealt with an employee whose conditions of service were altered by their employer. The entitlement to gratuity at the end of the employment relationship was not mentioned in the new conditions of employment despite being in the previous conditions that regulated his employment.

The Supreme Court provided that where acquiescence is intended to be assumed from conduct, credible evidence will have to be led, showing that the employee was by clear notice given by the employer indeed aware of the variation, understood the implications and its full extent, before …

Daniel Mwale V Njolomole Mtonga And Another Appeal No.004 (2019), Dunia P. Zongwe

SAIPAR Case Review

This is a classic case of sour grapes. After failing to secure a favourable decision from the judges, the losing party accused them of prejudice. This happened in the Mwale v Mtonga matter, decided by the Supreme Court of Zambia in 2019. When his appeal failed, Daniel Mwale reacted by accusing that court and the entire judiciary of corruption.

The Mwale v Mtonga dispute brings up a number of themes: perceptions of corruption in the courts, unjustified public attacks against the judiciary, constraints on judges’ ability to respond to those attacks, the airing of corruption allegations in the wrong forum, …

George Peter Mwanza And Melvin Beene V Attorney General Appeal No. 153/2016 Sc Selected Judgment No. 33 Of 2019, Ellah T.M. Siang’Andu

SAIPAR Case Review

On the 9th December 2019, the Supreme Court of Zambia delivered a landmark decision changing the human rights jurisprudence in the context of protecting and preserving the fundamental human rights of prisoners. The appellants were HIV positive and were both in custody at the Lusaka Central Prison. They petitioned the High Court contending breach of their rights to life and protection from inhuman treatment contrary to the Republican Constitution. The argument of the appellants was that the State’s failure to consider their dietary and health needs, due to the budgetary and logistical restraints, fell short of all prescribed standards for …

Abedinego Kapeshi And Another V The People Scz Selected Judgment No. 35 Of 2017, Gift Sangende

SAIPAR Case Review

In 2017, the appellants, being dissatisfied with the judgment of the Kabwe High Court appealed to the Supreme Court. They contended among other things, that the trial court erred in law to convict the appellants of murder. They further stated that the court erred in law to sentence the appellants to life imprisonment, as the sentence was excessive.

This case accorded the Supreme Court a great opportunity to discuss the belief in witchcraft and the offending conduct premised on that belief, as well as the multiple violations that are coupled with the same belief. Remarkably, the Court moved away from …

Konkola Copper Mines Plc V Nyasulu And 2000 Others Appeal No. 1/2012, Pamela Towela Sambo

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Kilolo Ng’Ambi V Opa Kapijimpanga Appeal No. 210/2015 (Judgment Of 9th October 2018), O'Brien Kaaba

SAIPAR Case Review

This was an appeal against the High Court decision relating to succession disputes for the Kapijimpanga chieftaincy in North Western Zambia. The incumbent chief died on the throne in 2008. Duly following the traditional succession process, the traditional electoral college (composed of certain members of the royal family) gathered in September 2010 to choose the next chief. Six contenders emerged and were all considered eligible. The electoral college could not agree on which one of them should be chief and the process ended in a deadlock. In consequence, the electoral college executed a written agreement among themselves to enlist a …

Fundamental Rights Not So Fundamental? Critique Of The Supreme Court Judgment In Law Association Of Zambia V. The Attorney General, Muna B. Ndulo, Samuel Ngure Ndungu

Southern African Journal of Policy and Development

The article discusses the constitutionality of sections 5 and 6 of the Public Order Act of Zambia. The Law Association of Zambia had unsuccessfully argued in the High Court of Zambia that the sections violated section 20 (Freedom of expression) and 21 (Freedom of assembly) of the Zambian Constitution. The Supreme Court of Zambia upheld the decision of the High Court and held that the sections did not violate sections 20 and 21 of the constitution and were constitutional. This article argues that the Supreme Court decision is wrong and falls short of effectively protecting citizen’s rights of peaceful assembly …