Claim OwnershipMy Two Cents: A Zambian Case Law Podcast
Subscribed: 8Played: 55
Subscribe
© George Malipilo
Description
A podcast explaining decided Zambian Judgments
23 Episodes
Reverse
The Supreme Court for Zambia had to determine the issue of whether between the Industrial Relations Court or High Court, which Court has jurisdiction to deal with employment matters for terminal benefits and redundancy packages. Please note that I did mention the case of ZANACO v Martin Musonda, However, the case is a Constitutional Court Judgment and not a Supreme Court Judgment as mentioned. I did mention other cases similar to the P.C.Cheelo, that haven been decided by the Court of Appeal for Zambia and our Supreme Court: Full citation of the said cases are listed below. Cosmas Mukuka v Jason Mwansa SCZ Selected Judgment No.13 of 2019Cavmont Bank Limited v John Mwansa Kalinde and 40 Others Appeal No.309/2021Links to My 2 Cents Episodes on Jurisdiction. Godfrey Miyanda vs The High Court ( Episode 19)- Season OneLink : https://www.spreaker.com/episode/53148863 Sithole v Sithole (Episode 16) - Season One Link: https://www.spreaker.com/episode/48448969
The High Court for Zambia had to determine , inter alia , the following issues ; Whether a legal practitioner can commence proceedings in his personal capacity requesting for payment of legal fees ; andWhether a legal practitioner can practice and represent clients independent of a law firm ? . N.B: This Podcast is for educational purposes only and does not render any legal advise . Please get in touch with a legal practitioner for legal representation.
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Zambia had to determine:"Whether the petitoner was entitled to be retained on the Respondent's payroll following his retirement until payment of his pension benefit?"Disclaimer : This podcast does not provide any legal advise as it is for educational purposes . Please ensure you seek advice from a practitioner whenever a dispute arises .
The issues for determination in this Case were as follows ;(i) Does the Supreme Court of the Republic Of Zambia have power to listen to an application on first instance? ; (ii) Can the Supreme Court of the Republic Of Zambia order a Judge of the High-Court to perform their judiciary functions?Disclaimer : This is an educational podcast on the law and does not provide any leagal advise . Please contact a lawyer if you require legal advise.
The issue for determination by the High-Court of the Republic of Zambia was: " Whether Section 15 (1) of the Corrupt Practices Act contravened Article 20 (7) of the Constitution of Zambia?".N.B: Kindly note this podcast does not provide any legal advice as it is only for educational purposes.If you need legal advice , please engage a legal Practitioner.
The Issues for determination in this matter were; (i)Does the surviving spouse have a prior eligibility to be appointed as administrator over the deceased‘s relatives? ; (ii)Whether the surviving spouse should be informed and consulted before the appointed of the administrator?
The issues for determination in this Divorce Case before the High-Court of the Republic of Zambia were as follows ; (i) Which ceremony between the Customary Marriage or the Stautory Marriage created the marriage ?; (ii) Did the Marriage Ordiance Act Allow for a conversion of a vaild potentially polygamous marriage to a valid monogamous marriage? , and (ii) Did the High-Court have jurisdiction under the Matrimonial Cause Rules 1968 to entertain the said Petition and adjudicate the said matter?
Law Issue in this case.This was a Constitutional matter before the High Court that was tasked with determining whether or not the President of the Republic of Zambia has the legitimate authority/power to issue directives to limit access to the usage of Public Owned Media Houses by opposition political parties. Brief Background to matter.The President of the Republic of Zambia in 1990, The late Dr. Kenneth David Kunda had, at a news conference, issued a directive that certain government owned newspapers were not to provide coverage to or accept advertisements from the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy (“MMD”), the main opposition political party at the time. The petitioners as a result of the said decision by the then President did herein apply to the High Court for on order quashing and setting aside the directive given by the President limiting access to Government owned media houses to the opposition, as it was the petitioners view that the said directive violated their rights in terms of article 22 and 25 of the Constitution of Zambia,1991. Kindly note that at 10:23 of this episode, the Host does make mention that the Constitutional Court has been given authority to adjudicate on Constitutional violation. Please be informed that the correct Constitutional provision is Article 128 of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment No.2 of 2016) .
This case deals with conviction of an accused person on purely indirect evidence (Circumstantial Evidence) without any eye witness present at the scene of the crime . The Brief facts of this Appeal Case before the Supreme Court of Zambia is that Patrick Sakala was convicted for the offence of murder pursuant to Section 200 of the Penal Code. Patrick Sakala had murdered a four year old boy after the boy's mother had refused the advancement made by Patrick Sakala. The issue for determination was whether or not Patrick Sakala had actually killed the boy keeping in mind that the were no eye witness or actual medical report submitted and other circumstances that may have caused the death had not been ruled out .
The episode explains the changes that have been implemented so as to deliver a better podcast for the various listeners. In addition, this episode provides the listeners with an insight of the new addition features and changes that been applied to the podcast. If you have a case you would to be featured on the podcast ,get in touch with me through the details listed below. Email: georgemalipilo23@gmail.comFacebook Messenger: George Chintankwa Malipilo . Thankyou very much for taking the time to listen to the podcast.
This is a conclusion episode concerning the case of Fredrick .M.Kunda . This episode gives a deeper analysis of why the Supreme Court of Zambia reversed the Judgement of the Subordinate Court, which relied on a specific Criminal provision of the Law that was now repealed and not enforceable . The episode also talks about Section 122 of the Juveniles Act,Chapter 53 of the Laws of Zambia and how a Child will be treated as a witness and the criminal law procedural that ought to be followed by the trial court in such cases . Music by Bensound .
1This is an Appeal from the Judgement of the Subordinate Court (Herein also known as the Magistrate Court) in which it found the Appellant guilty of the offence of defilement of a 7 year old Children .The High Court For Zambia which passed sentencing due to the limitation power of the Magistrate, give the offender, 25 Years imprisonment with Hard Labour . The Appellant now brought his matter before the Supreme Court of Zambia in a bid to overturn his conviction on the basis of inter alia (Among other thing) that the manner in how the Magistrate received was not correct as the voire dire was defective . Music by Bensound.
The Respondent in the Supreme Court of.Zambia ("Hill and Delamain Zambia Limited") had taken out Court Process ( Writ of Summons + Statement of Claim) to recover monies owed for services rendered at the instance and request of the Appellant in the Supreme Court of Zambia ("Associated Chemiclas Limited") .The Crux of the Appellant's argument in the Supreme Court of Zambia was that due to a clause in the Shareholder Purchase Agreement (Associated Chemicals Limited) , The old shareholders(Two Patels) and no either the Company nor thr new shareholder (Mr Kilasa) were liable for this debt owed to the Respondent as the Agreement had an indemnify clause that stated the previous Shareholders would undertake to settle financial liabilities incurred prior to the sale of the Share. This case therefore looked into the principals relating to the Legal Status of a Company and the difference between a Shareholder and a Company .This is also a Landmark Judgement on Company Law in Zambia and is still good Law . Music by BensSound .
This was an appeal from the Judgement of the High Court for Zambia that the Plaintiff having defaulted on the Loan agreement between itself and the Defendant . The Plaintiff therefore owed an outstanding amount of ZMW 36,642.71 and that the Defendant was within it's Contractual lane when it sold the Truck that had been placed as security for a Loan argreement of ZMW 45,000.00. According to the brief facts , Angel Musonda (The Appellant) had entered into a Loan argeement with Pulse Finance Services Limited (The Respondent) and had agreed to pay back the money in a period of 36 months .However, The Appellant seriously defaulted on her loan agreement and the Respondent seized the Truck and sold it for ZMW 20,000.00 so it could cover it's money . The Respondent got ZMW 17,000.00 The Appellant brought this matter to Court on the premise that it's was illegal for the Respondent to have sold the Truck as a result this lead to damages to the Appellant's business life , Angel Musonda therefore want the Court to order the Respondent to pay him damages to this effect . Music by Bensound ..
The main argument in this Intellectual Property dispute was; whether or not a proprietor of unregistered Trademark , can prevent another person or company from registering that trademark . Music by "BenSound"
The issues that the Supreme Court of Zambia had to decided were; (i) Whether International Agreements that have not been domesticated despite been ratified and assented to by the State are applied in Zambia; and (ii) Whether Judges can cite International Agreements that are yet to be domesticated as an Act of Parliament . Music by Bensound
This appeal before the Supreme Court of Zambia discusses he mode of commencement for Civil proceedings in the High-Court for Zambia . Music by Bensound (c) 2019
The Supreme Court of Zambia was asked by Appellant to decided as to whether the High-Court of Zambia had erred in Law by not following the case of Donoghue v Stevenson (English Judgement) by herein Stating that he did not consume the adulterated drink and such could not claim damages. Music from Bensound .
The issue before the Supreme Court of Zambia was if One half of the Siwale Children herein ("Henry Mpanjilwa Siwale ;Reverend Ewen Siwale ,Kelvin Siwale and others being children of the Deceased Donaldo Siwale) were entitled to be included on the Title Deeds for Farm No.5032 ,Nakonde which was in the name of the younger brother (Musenge Siwale).The Late Donaldo Siwale had left 400 Hectreas of Customary Land which the Respondent then placed on Title in his name only without his elder brothers have a clue. Note : I meant to say the Supreme Court of Zambia granted judgement for the Appellants not Respondent to be included on the Title Deeds . Music from Bensound.com
The Issue for determination before the Supreme Court of Zambia was whether Z.P.A Payment in lieu of Notice was unlawful and unjustified . The Second issue for determination before the Supreme Court of Zambia was In the event No Termination Period or Notice clause is expressed stated in the Contract of Employment . What will be the accepted or reasonable notice to give the employee about the termination of the employment ?Music from bensound.com
Top Podcasts
The Best New Comedy Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best News Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New Business Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New Sports Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New True Crime Podcast Right Now – June 2024The Best New Joe Rogan Experience Podcast Right Now – June 20The Best New Dan Bongino Show Podcast Right Now – June 20The Best New Mark Levin Podcast – June 2024
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
United States
Counsel Malipilo you're doing great job ... continue with the work.