๐—–๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐˜ ๐—ก๐—ฒ๐˜„๐˜€ - ๐—ฆ๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ฒ ๐—–๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐˜ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐—”๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ฆ๐˜‚๐˜€๐˜๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ป๐˜€ ๐—ฆ๐˜๐—ฎ๐˜† ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐—˜๐˜…๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐˜‚๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ถ๐—ป ๐—Ÿ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐——๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐˜‚๐˜๐—ฒ ๐—–๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ฒ

๐— ๐—ฆ๐—–๐—” ๐— ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ฐ๐—ฒ๐—น๐—น๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฒ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐˜€ ๐—”๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—น๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ก๐—ผ ๐Ÿญ๐Ÿญ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฌ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฑ

๐——๐˜†๐˜€๐—ผ๐—ป ๐— ๐—ธ๐˜„๐—ฎ๐—ฝ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฟ๐—ฎ (๐—”๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—น๐—น๐—ฎ๐—ป๐˜)

๐—ฉ.

๐— ๐—ฟ ๐— ๐—ฎ๐—น๐˜‚๐—ป๐—ด๐—ฎ (๐Ÿญ๐˜€๐˜ ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜)

๐— ๐—ฟ ๐— ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐˜†๐—ฒ๐—ธ๐—ฎ (๐Ÿฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜)

๐— ๐—ฟ ๐—ž๐—ต๐—ผ๐—ป๐˜†๐—ผ๐—น๐—ฎ (๐Ÿฏ๐—ฟ๐—ฑ ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜)

๐Ÿฑ๐˜๐—ต ๐—”๐˜‚๐—ด๐˜‚๐˜€๐˜ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฌ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฑ - ๐—•๐—ฒ๐—ณ๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—›๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐—ฏ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐—๐˜‚๐˜€๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ ๐——๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜„๐—ฎ๐˜†๐—ผ ๐— ๐—ฎ๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐—ฆ๐—–, ๐—๐—”

The Malawi Supreme Court of Appeal has sustained an order of stay of execution in the matter of Dyson Mkwapatira V. Mr. Malunga, Mr. Manyeka, and Mr. Khonyola, pending the determination of an appeal.

The case arises from a land dispute in which the High Court had dismissed Mr. Mkwapatiraโ€™s claim and denied him an injunction. Dissatisfied with that decision, the applicant sought a stay of execution before the High Court, which was refused. This prompted an application to the Supreme Court of Appeal under its concurrent jurisdiction.

In his ruling, Honourable Justice Dingiswayo Madise, SC, JA, noted that courts generally do not stay execution of judgments unless there are special circumstances, such as where failing to do so would cause great injustice and render the appeal nugatory.

Evidence presented showed that third parties, invited by the respondents, were erecting structures on the disputed land, a fact not contested by the respondents. Justice Madise held that allowing such developments to continue before the appeal is heard would prejudice the applicantโ€™s rights.

The Court overruled a preliminary objection by the respondents challenging the validity of the appeal, clarifying that under Order 3 Rule 3 of the Supreme Court of Appeal Rules, a notice of appeal may be filed before leave to appeal is granted, provided leave is subsequently obtained.

The stay of execution has been sustained on the following conditions:

1. The applicant to settle the record of appeal within 14 days.

2. The applicant to enter the appeal with the Registrar of the Court within 7 days thereafter.

Costs were ordered to be in the cause.

Add new comment

Restricted HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h2 id> <h3 id> <h4 id> <h5 id> <h6 id>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.