Skip to document content
Skip to main menu
Skip to search
Home
Judgments
Legislation
Gazettes
Bills
About
Help
Home
Judgments
High Court of Malawi Civil Division
High Court of Malawi Civil Division - 1995 September
2 judgments
Advanced search
Court registries
Skip past Court registries
Lilongwe District Registry
Mzuzu District Registry
Principal Registry
Years
Skip past years
All years
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2008
2007
2003
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1990
1988
1987
1986
1985
1981
1973
Browse by year
All years
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2008
2007
2003
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1990
1988
1987
1986
1985
1981
1973
Months
Skip past months
All months
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Browse by month
All months
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Filters
Skip to results
Filters
Alphabet
Skip to next filter group
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
q
r
s
t
u
v
w
x
y
z
Filter documents by title
Sort documents by
Title (A - Z)
Title (Z - A)
Date (Newest first)
Date (Oldest first)
Filter
Results. 2 judgments found.
2 judgments
Citation
Sort by Citation ascending
Judgment date
Sort by Judgment date ascending
September 1995
Barrigas Building Contractors Ltd v Trustees of Tea Research Foundation (Central Africa) (Civil Cause 2086 of 1994) [1995] MWHCCiv 7 (27 September 1995)
A defendant seeking to set aside a default judgment must show a bona fide, particularised defence with a real prospect of success; mere assertions are inadequate.
Civil procedure — Default judgment — Application to set aside — Defendant must show bona fide defence on the merits with a real prospect of success — Mere unparticularised allegations (unworkmanlike performance, unexplained deductions) insufficient.
27 September 1995
Kapito v AG (Civil Cause 1980 of 1994) [1995] MWHCCiv 13 (27 September 1995)
Section 138 is invalid insofar as it purports to oust ordinary courts' jurisdiction over constitutional or judicial matters.
Constitutional law — jurisdiction of ordinary courts — Section 138 National Compensation Tribunal — whether Tribunal ousts courts’ exclusive jurisdiction — constitutional invalidity where law purports to oust judicial jurisdiction (section 11(4)); access to courts (section 41(2)); judicial review (section 142).
27 September 1995
1
Current page, page 1
>