Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

Supreme Court of Zambia - 2006 January

4 judgments
Advanced search
Skip past Court registries
Skip past years
Skip past months
Filters
Skip to results
4 judgments
January 2006
Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines v Katyamba and Ors (SCZ 1 of 2006) [2006] ZMSC 17 (31 January 2006)
Section 85(3) requires administrative steps to be taken within the thirty-day period to justify an extension; late attempts cannot revive the time.
  • Industrial and Labour Relations Act s85(3) — mandatory thirty-day limitation — extension only where administrative channels exhausted within thirty days — late correspondence not sufficient — distinction from KCM v Kanswata — court of substantial justice cannot override statutory time bar.
31 January 2006
Fred Musonda v Barclays Bank Zambia Limited (Appeal No. 128/04) [2006] ZMSC 48 (24 January 2006)
Findings of fact and undisputed misconduct justified summary dismissal despite alleged procedural irregularities.
  • Employment law — unfair/wrongful dismissal — disciplinary procedure and procedural fairness — findings of fact not appealable (Section 97 Industrial and Labour Relations Act) — proof/identification of misconduct — summary dismissal justified where offence undisputed (Zambia National Provident Fund v Chirwa).
24 January 2006
Chimambo and Others v Commissioner of Lands and Others [2006] ZMSC 33 (10 January 2006)
Whether land grants made during de‑gazettement remain valid and whether allocations after re‑gazettement without statutory authority are lawful.
  • Forest law — de‑gazettement and re‑gazettement — validity of grants made during de‑gazetted period; Administrative law — judicial review — illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety of grants made after re‑gazettement without statutory authority; Civil procedure — availability of declaratory relief in judicial review and counter‑claims (Order 53).
10 January 2006
Nyoni v Chilanga Cement PLC (Appeal 128 of 2003) [2006] ZMSC 32 (10 January 2006)
Interlocutory injunction required where damages are inadequate for loss of land interest and employer car benefit may survive termination.
  • Injunctions — interest in land — damages inadequate; interlocutory injunction appropriate where probable entitlement exists; separation of house-purchase agreement from redundancy computation; employer car-loan scheme — status quo pending trial.
10 January 2006