Automated Summary
Key Facts
The court denied the plaintiffs' application to review a prior ruling on October 7, 2013, as no new facts were presented. The applications for review and stay of execution were dismissed with costs to the defendants, and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted.
Issues
- The Plaintiffs also sought a stay of execution pending the determination of their review application. This was denied as the court found no likelihood of success in the review, with the stay application dismissed alongside the review application.
- The court considered the Plaintiffs' application for review of its ruling dated 7th October 2013, which addressed preliminary issues. The application was dismissed as the Plaintiffs failed to present new facts or arguments warranting a review, with the judge opining that an appeal would have been the appropriate course.
Holdings
- Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted, allowing the Plaintiffs to pursue further legal action against the court's decision.
- The court denied the application for a stay of execution, stating the Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any likelihood of success in their appeal of the 7th October 2013 Ruling.
- The court declined to review its Ruling of 7th October 2013 as the Plaintiffs did not present new facts or arguments beyond what was previously considered. The application for Review was dismissed with costs to the Defendants.
Remedies
- Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court is granted.
- Applications for Review and for Stay of execution are both dismissed with costs to the Defendants to be taxed in default of agreement.
Legal Principles
The court declined to review its prior ruling under judicial review standards (including Wednesbury reasonableness), as the plaintiffs reused existing arguments and failed to demonstrate new material facts. Leave to appeal was granted instead.
Cited Statute
- High Court Rule Chapter 27 of the Laws of Zambia
- Rules of the Supreme Court 1999 Edition
Judge Name
D.Y. Sichinga
Passage Text
- I will not consider the application for leave to amend statement of claim and writ as I will not proceed to hear this matter at trial.
- I have carefully considered the affidavits in support of this application deposed to by the First Plaintiff, Alfred Mphalo and they do not reveal any new facts to the facts that this court had at the time that it considered its Ruling of 7th October 2013. In my considered view since the Plaintiffs were relying on the same arguments and facts raised at the time of hearing the Preliminary Issues, the correct course to take would have been to appeal the Ruling.
- For the reasons advanced above, I decline to review my Ruling of 7th October 2014, and I equally decline to grant a stay in this matter. The application for Review and for Stay of execution are both dismissed with costs to the Defendants to be taxed in default of agreement.