Results.
53 judgments found.
|
|
|
| December 2021 |
|
|
A single judge cannot extend time to reopen a full court judgment; alleged slips were substantive, not clerical.
-
Procedure — Jurisdiction of single judge to extend time — Finality of full court decisions — Slip rule: clerical error vs substantive attack — Time runs from perfected judgment (signed/sealed/dated).
|
30 December 2021 |
|
Court dismissed leave to appeal as moot and declined to decide whether Order 3 or local statutes govern time computation.
-
Judicial review — computation of time — applicability of Order 3 (White Book) versus local statutes — mootness doctrine — leave to appeal under section 13 of the Court of Appeal Act.
|
29 December 2021 |
|
Out‑of‑time leave and stay dismissed; exhibited ruling found altered and counsel referred for possible professional misconduct.
-
Civil procedure — leave to appeal — mandatory 14‑day time limit under Supreme Court Rules (rule 48(1)) — extension under rule 12 — stay of execution — appellate jurisdiction to vary judgments — falsified court document — counsel’s professional misconduct referral.
|
24 December 2021 |
|
A litigant’s counsel’s mistaken belief about appeal deadlines does not justify extending time for leave to appeal.
-
Civil procedure — Extension of time under Rule 12; leave to appeal to Supreme Court; counsel's mistaken belief about time limits; procedural default; merits requirement for leave; costs.
|
23 December 2021 |
|
A recast renewed application is permissible, but private mortgage-accounting issues lacked public importance; leave refused with costs.
-
Civil procedure — renewed application for leave to appeal — competence of a recast application before a single judge — leave criteria under section 13: public importance, prospects of success, other compelling reasons — mortgagee in possession and receivership accounting — burden of proof.
|
17 December 2021 |
|
Leave to appeal from a court-martial refused because the applicant failed to file proposed grounds and the trial transcript.
-
Defence Act — appeals from courts-martial — leave to appeal required — applicant must provide proposed grounds and court-martial transcript to show prospects — procedural compliance (Order 59 r.4).
|
17 December 2021 |
|
Second‑hand trailers qualify for SADC preferences only if imported solely for recovery of raw materials.
-
SADC Protocol — rules of origin — interpretation of Rules 2(1) and 4(1) — used/second‑hand goods; certificates of origin prima facie but verifiable (Rule 9(3)); legitimate expectation not founded on unlawful/mistaken representation; tax exemptions interpreted strictly.
|
15 December 2021 |
|
Related eyewitnesses' evidence need not be treated as suspect absent bias; photographic and post‑mortem corroboration can sustain conviction despite fingerprint omissions.
-
Criminal law — eyewitness evidence — related witnesses not automatically suspect; corroboration by photographs and post‑mortem — identity corroborated by presence at scene — failure to fingerprint weapon not fatal where ample other evidence implicates accused.
|
7 December 2021 |
|
Whether a withdrawn cross-appeal may be restored years later when no fundamental error is shown and counsel misled the court.
-
Practice and procedure — Appeal and cross-appeal — Restoration of withdrawn cross-appeal — Rule 48(5) and Rule 63 — Fundamental error as basis for restoration — Withdrawal vs nullity — Abuse of process — Duty of legal practitioners not to mislead court — Personal costs for misconduct.
|
2 December 2021 |
| November 2021 |
|
|
Cogent circumstantial evidence and credible weapon identification upheld conviction; appeal dismissed.
-
Criminal law — Circumstantial evidence — Identification of weapon — Alibi — Appellate review of witness credibility and findings of fact.
|
2 November 2021 |
| October 2021 |
|
|
Appellant may withdraw and amend a defective record of appeal under Rule 68 where respondents suffer no prejudice.
-
Civil procedure — Appeal — Record of appeal — Compliance with Rule 58(2) & 58(4)(j) — Amendment under Rule 68 — Supplementary record under Rule 59 — Dismissal vs curative amendment — Prejudice test.
|
27 October 2021 |
|
|
26 October 2021 |
|
Appeal dismissed: conviction for indecent assault upheld based on opportunity, unexplained conduct and guard's evidence despite limited direct corroboration.
-
Criminal law — Sexual offences — Requirement of corroboration of both commission and identity — Corroboration by opportunity and unexplained 'odd coincidences' — Late complaint by a child complainant — Appellate review of sufficiency of evidence.
|
5 October 2021 |
| September 2021 |
|
|
|
24 September 2021 |
|
Renewal motion was incompetent because it functioned as an appeal, not reasserting original grounds to meet section 13 threshold.
-
Procedure — Renewal to full Court under section 4(b) Supreme Court Act and rule 48(4) — Distinction between renewal and appeal — Competency of motion where applicant attacks single judge rather than reasserting original grounds to meet section 13(3) threshold (Court of Appeal Act).
|
22 September 2021 |
|
A single judge lacks jurisdiction to hear post‑judgment extension applications affecting an appealed decision; such applications go to the full Court.
-
Civil procedure — Jurisdiction of single judge v full Court — Interpretation of s.4 Supreme Court Act and Rule 48(5) — Post‑decision applications (extension of time/motion to re‑open) must be made to full Court — No obligation to hear parties on jurisdiction where forum lacks jurisdiction.
|
16 September 2021 |
|
Circumstantial recent-possession evidence upheld convictions; death for murder affirmed and life imprisonment for aggravated robbery imposed.
-
Criminal law — Circumstantial evidence and recent possession of stolen property — identification of goods without receipts/serial numbers — drawing only reasonable inference of guilt — aggravated robbery elements (offensive weapon) — appellate deference to trial judge credibility findings — sentencing: separate sentences; death for murder; life imprisonment for aggravated robbery where grievous bodily harm not pleaded.
|
7 September 2021 |
|
Court allowed withdrawal and amendment of a non‑compliant record of motion, holding dismissal is discretionary and fact‑dependent.
-
Civil procedure — record of motion — withdrawal to correct non‑compliance — Rule 68(2) discretionary; withdrawal not automatically dismissal — Rubicon principle and prejudice as determinative factors.
|
3 September 2021 |
| August 2021 |
|
|
|
10 August 2021 |
|
|
10 August 2021 |
| July 2021 |
|
|
Supreme Court declined leave to appeal, finding VAT-on-settlement-capital dispute not a point of law of public importance.
-
Tax law — VAT on finance lease settlement capital — Whether VAT payable upon premature termination of a finance lease; Leave to appeal — point of law of public importance; Supreme Court jurisdiction — filtering appeals from Court of Appeal; Zambia Revenue Authority guidance considered.
|
30 July 2021 |
|
|
14 July 2021 |
|
|
8 July 2021 |
| June 2021 |
|
|
High Court may enforce Bill of Rights but cannot review or annul decisions of superior courts; appeals under Article 28 lie to the Supreme Court.
-
Constitutional law — Article 28 enforcement of Bill of Rights — scope of High Court powers; Article 128 Constitutional Court jurisdiction; appellate route under Article 28(2)(b); limits on reviewing superior courts; abuse of process/forum shopping.
|
18 June 2021 |
| May 2021 |
|
|
|
17 May 2021 |
|
|
6 May 2021 |
| April 2021 |
|
|
|
26 April 2021 |
|
|
23 April 2021 |
|
|
23 April 2021 |
|
|
23 April 2021 |
|
|
23 April 2021 |
|
|
23 April 2021 |
|
|
21 April 2021 |
|
|
21 April 2021 |
|
|
21 April 2021 |
|
|
21 April 2021 |
|
|
21 April 2021 |
|
|
21 April 2021 |
|
|
15 April 2021 |
|
|
14 April 2021 |
| March 2021 |
|
|
A writ need not be endorsed if accompanied by a full statement of claim; appeal dismissed with costs.
-
Civil procedure — Writ of summons — Endorsement of claim — Order VI(1) High Court Rules (as amended by SI No.71 of 1997) — Action may be commenced by writ endorsed with or accompanied by full statement of claim.
|
31 March 2021 |
|
|
31 March 2021 |
|
A taxpayer must produce ASYCUDA/CE20 documents bearing its TPIN and assessment number to claim import VAT refunds; failure permits disallowance.
-
Tax law — VAT refunds — prescribed documentary evidence for imported goods — ASYCUDA/CE20 to carry TPIN and assessment number (Rule 15(1)) — burden of proof on taxpayer to substantiate refund claims — disallowance justified for mismatching/wrong TPINs — corporate representation by advocate; lay representation disallowed.
|
25 March 2021 |
|
|
25 March 2021 |
|
|
24 March 2021 |
|
Appellant’s 35-year manslaughter sentence reduced to 10 years due to guilty plea, first-offender status and remorse.
-
Criminal law — Sentencing — Manslaughter of infant — Aggravating conduct (assault on mother) versus mitigation (first offender, guilty plea, remorse) — Consistency and predictability in appellate sentencing — Reduction of excessive sentence.
|
4 March 2021 |
|
Circumstantial and leading evidence corroborated by physical items and recent possession justified convictions; appeal dismissed.
-
Criminal law — circumstantial evidence — admissibility of evidence obtained by accused 'leading' police — voluntariness — doctrine of recent possession — evidential weight of real evidence; failure to lift fingerprints not fatal where possession is established.
|
4 March 2021 |
|
Appeal allowed: smuggling conviction overturned where evidence did not establish procurement of illegal entry into Zambia.
-
Anti-Human Trafficking Act — smuggling of persons — requirement of procuring illegal entry into the country — conflict of accounts as to place of pickup (inside Zambia v outside) — weight of unchallenged witness evidence — conviction and sentence set aside.
|
4 March 2021 |
| January 2021 |
|
|
Appellants' fortification order set aside and interlocutory injunction discharged for lack of formal application and improper merits determination.
-
Interlocutory injunctions — fortification of cross‑undertaking to pay damages — Order 29/L/29 RSC requires a formal application with affidavit evidence showing likely significant loss and insufficiency of ordinary undertaking; skeleton argument insufficient — courts must not decide substantive merits at interlocutory stage — expired exclusivity/no evidence of extension — injunction improperly granted.
|
28 January 2021 |
|
Slip-rule correction denied where application amounted to substantive review and was filed beyond the fourteen-day limit under Rule 48(5).
-
Civil procedure — Supreme Court Rules: Rule 78 (slip rule) permits correction of clerical/typographical slips only; not a vehicle for substantive review. Rule 48(5) requires applications involving an appeal decision to be made within fourteen days. Time-barred and substantive complaints cannot be cured under the slip rule
|
21 January 2021 |