|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
An interim injunction restrained defendants' destructive activities in a Game Management Area due to likely irreparable environmental harm.
Environmental law – interim injunction – American Cyanamid test – serious question to be tried – irreparable environmental harm – adequacy of damages – balance of convenience – locus standi – water abstraction – Game Management Area protections.
|
|
Judgment |
25 January 2022 |
|
Payment of fees after licence expiry does not entitle the applicant to reinstatement where the area is already licensed.
Mines and Minerals Act — expiry versus renewal of mining rights — application versus renewal; annual/area charges; allocation of vacated areas; public officer not per se disqualified from holding mining rights; burden of proof on applicant.
|
|
Judgment |
30 July 2021 |
|
Interlocutory injunction granted to restrain alleged unlawful mining/exploration on disputed land pending trial.
Interlocutory injunction — American Cyanamid test: serious question to be tried; adequacy of damages; balance of convenience — preservation of status quo — competing surface rights and mining/exploration rights — environmental assessment and Director of Mines' consent issues.
|
|
Judgment |
22 August 2020 |
|
Injunction granted to protect an environmentally sensitive aquifer; State immunity does not shield an SPV from court orders.
Environmental law – interim injunction to protect environmentally sensitive recharge area; EMA s4 right to clean environment; ZEMA Protection Order and Decision Letter; pre‑conditions (WARMA compliance, hydrological study) as conditions precedent; State Proceedings Act – SPV separate legal personality not immune; irreparable environmental harm and balance of convenience.
|
|
Judgment |
17 February 2020 |
|
A party likely to be affected by reissued exploration rights ought to be joined under Order 14/5(1) HCR.
Procedure — Joinder of parties — Order 14/5(1) HCR and Order 15/4(1) RSC — person entitled to or claiming interest in the subject matter or likely to be affected — ministerial cancellation and reissuance of petroleum exploration licence — discretion to join aimed at effective adjudication — distinction from Abel Mulenga.
|
|
Judgment |
28 November 2018 |
|
Court quashed verbal timber export ban for illegality, ordered licences issued; damages claim dismissed.
Judicial review — Forests Act (ss. 50, 53, 62) — Illegality and procedural impropriety for failure to give written notice and show cause — Ministerial verbal export ban unsupported by statute — Mandamus to statutory officer to issue/renew licences — Damages/compensation dismissed; s.56(1)(b) bars compensation.
|
|
Judgment |
28 July 2018 |
|
High Court retains jurisdiction to hear trespass and nuisance claims where respondents lack mining or non-mining rights.
Mining Appeals Tribunal – scope of jurisdiction – Sections 96–98, 100 Mines and Minerals Development Act – original versus appellate jurisdiction – statutory interpretation – trespass and nuisance claims against persons without mining rights – mode of commencement and jurisdiction.
|
|
Judgment |
12 June 2018 |
|
|
|
Judgment |
23 February 2018 |
|
Court allowed final extension to file record of appeal, finding delay not inordinate nor prejudicial.
Civil procedure – appeal – extension of time to file record of appeal – Order 13 Rule 3(3) Court of Appeal Rules – inordinate delay a question of fact – prejudice to respondent – dismissal for want of prosecution.
|
|
Judgment |
28 November 2017 |
|
Plaintiff’s Sheriff-auction acquisition of immovable mining assets failed due to irregular execution and lack of statutory surface rights and licence.
Civil procedure – Execution and sale by Sheriff – writ of fieri facias vs sale of immovable property; Sheriff’s Act ss14–15 – indemnity and purchaser protection; High Court Rules Order XLII – elegit and execution procedure; Mines and Minerals Development Act – mineral processing licence, surface rights, village consent and Zambian shareholding requirements; bona fide purchaser for value/no notice.
|
|
Judgment |
28 September 2017 |
|
A court cannot enter judgment on admission based on interlocutory findings; admissions must be clear and unconditional.
Civil procedure – Judgment on admission – admissions must be clear, unequivocal and unconditional – Order 21 HCR and Order 27 RSC; Interlocutory injunction – limits of findings at interlocutory stage; affidavit evidence incomplete and not substitute for trial; discretion to enter judgment on admission; remittal for trial.
|
|
Judgment |
14 September 2017 |
|
An appeal based on inconsistent appeal documents and a late amendment request is incompetent and dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Appeal – Memorandum of appeal must comply with Rule 58(2) – Inconsistent notice of appeal and grounds – Amendment of memorandum sought late – Prejudice to respondent – Appeal held incompetent and dismissed.
|
|
Judgment |
24 November 2015 |
|
EIA consultation rights are not limited to title-holders; project approvals and remedial consultations justified dismissal of the appeal.
Environmental law – EIA process and public consultation; locus standi not confined to title-holders; admissibility and weight of expert evidence; mining licence/outsourcing; Ministerial suspension and legitimate expectation; procedural compliance for change of land use.
|
|
Judgment |
30 October 2014 |
|
Default judgment entered prematurely was irregular; respondent lacked locus standi to sue over the public Environmental Protection Fund.
Civil procedure – Default judgment – Irregular entry before 21 days contrary to Practice Direction – Effect of irregular default judgment; Constitutional/public law – Locus standi under Mines and Minerals Development Act s.123 – Private litigant cannot compel EPF payments; Environmental Protection Fund – claims against public fund are State prerogative; Frivolous and vexatious claims; Costs follow event.
|
|
Judgment |
26 November 2013 |
|
Equitable assignment of land prevails over a later certificate issued in error; later title cancelled under s.34(1)(e).
Property law – equitable interest from unregistered assignment; priority of earlier title over later certificate; Commissioner of Lands’ improvident allocation; s.34(1)(e) Lands and Deeds Registry Act – cancellation of later certificate; no damages without proof.
|
|
Judgment |
16 October 2013 |
|
Receiver appointed by equitable execution over identifiable mining licence after fi.fa execution failed; affidavit of fitness dispensed with.
Equitable execution – appointment of receiver where writ of fi.fa failed; Order 30 RSC – description of property and affidavit of fitness; mining licence/mineral right as realisable asset; injunction ancillary to receivership; security, remuneration and accounts of receiver.
|
|
Judgment |
21 March 2013 |
|
Local authority’s unauthorized offer letters gave rise to refundable payments and a duty to recommend plaintiffs to the Commissioner of Lands.
Local government — State land allocation — Local authority issuing offer letters outside Commissioner of Lands’ powers — Illegality defence — Specific performance inappropriate where alienation power vested in Commissioner — Damages and administrative recommendation as remedy.
|
|
Judgment |
16 October 2012 |
|
Council's sand levy including crushed stones upheld as intra vires; originating summons appropriate; no double taxation found.
Local Government levies – By-laws imposing sand levy inclusive of crushed stones – Proper procedure (originating summons) for statutory construction – Wednesbury unreasonableness – No double taxation where national mining fees and local levies serve different taxing purposes.
|
|
Judgment |
3 August 2012 |
|
Whether an interlocutory injunction should restrain defendants amid competing registered title and customary occupation claims.
Civil procedure — Interim injunction — Land dispute — Registered title v customary occupation — Balance of convenience and risk of creating new conditions pending trial — Discharge of ex parte injunction.
|
|
Judgment |
5 March 2012 |
|
Mandatory interlocutory injunction ordered to remove unauthorised traders from road reserve due to safety risks and likely plaintiff success.
Interlocutory mandatory injunction — removal of unauthorised traders from road reserve — licencees without title or licence — balance of convenience and public safety — enforcement of judgment on admission.
|
|
Judgment |
14 June 2011 |
|
A caveator must prove an enforceable interest; mere assertion that land lies in a National Park does not justify a caveat.
Lands and Deeds Registry Act ss.76,77,81 – caveat requires disclosure and proof of an enforceable/beneficial interest; Zambia Wildlife Act s.13(1)(b) – grants in National Parks permissible if consistent with Act; burden of proof on caveator to show cause; inadmissibility of legal argument in affidavits (Order 5 Rules 15–16).
|
|
Judgment |
26 May 2011 |
|
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).
|
|
Judgment |
10 January 2006 |
|
A first‑class magistrate deputed within the same district may try an uncommenced case without formal transfer; an unjustified discharge is a nullity.
Criminal procedure – Transfer between magistrates of the same class within the same district – Formal order of transfer unnecessary for uncommenced (not part‑heard) cases – Discharge without hearing can be nullity and not an acquittal.
|
|
Judgment |
7 April 1980 |