IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI
CIVIL CAUSE NO.
1186 OF 2000
CENTRAL REGION WATER
CORAM: HIS HONOUR,
Mr. Chilenga of Counsel for the
Miss Nkhoma of
Counsel for the defendant
R U L I N G
This is a Summons for Summary
judgment pursuant to Order 14 of the Rules of the Supreme Court.
There is an affidavit in support
of this application deponed by Mr.
Marshall Chilenga of Counsel, legal practitioner of Messrs. Lexon &
Lords. This application
has been opposed by the defendant. There is
an affidavit in opposition deponed by Miss Innocentia Nkhoma of
Counsel, legal practitioner
in the firm of Messrs. Mvalo and Company.
Before I further delve into the matter, I am satisfied that the
before a Summons under Order 14 of the Rules of
the Supreme Court can be issued have all been met. I have heard the
made by both counsels. I have also gone through the
affidavits filed by both sides and have also gone through the
have been attached to these affidavits.
here to observe that the purpose of Order 14 is to enable the
plaintiff to obtain a quick judgment without trial if he/she
prove his/her claim clearly and if the defendant is unable to set up
a bona fide
defence or raise an issue against the claim which ought to be tried.
(Roberts v Plant
(1895) IQ.B. 597. It is again the policy
of Order 14 to prevent delay in cases where there is no defence.
I have looked at the
plaintiffs side of the story. Firstly, the issue of K90,000 as
special damages then secondly, the interpretation
of the Conditions
of Contract especially, the restraint of trade clause. After having
given the subject matter the best of its
scrutiny, I find that there
are triable issues here. This is not the type of case which can be
settled through Summary judgment
order. The defendant in their
submissions coupled with the affidavit in opposition have raised
pertinent issues which are worth
adjudicating upon in a full trial.
I therefore dismiss this application with costs.
IN CHAMBERS this 7th
day of May 2001 at Lilongwe.