Malawi Reinsurance Company Limited v Finance Bank of Malawi (452 of 2015) [2016] MWHC 510 (04 July 2016);

Share

 

MALAWI JUDICIARY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI

PRINCIPAL REGISTRY

CIVIL CAUSE NUMBER 452 OF 2015

 

BETWEEN

MALAWI REINSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED                                                         PLAINTIFF

and

FINANCE BANK OF MA LAWI LIMITED                                                                     DEFENDANT

(IN LIQUIDATION)

 

CORAM:  HIS HON. N. USIWA USIWA                                          DEPUTY REGISTRAR

                 Mr. B Mhango                                                                  of Counsel for the Plaintiff

                 Mr Ngunde                                                                       of Counsel for the Defendant

                 Mr. D Mtegha                                                                  Official Interpreter

 

ORDER ON JUDGEMENT ON ADMISSION

This is the Plaintiff's application for judgment on admission under Order .27/1, Rules of the Supreme Court.

The crux of the matter is that the Defendants ' Lawyer ticked a "yes" box under PART 3 of the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE OF W RIT OF SUMMONS which reads

"If you have said that you do not intend to contest the whole, or part, of the plaintiff's claim will you (the defendant) be asking the court for a stay of execution?"

When the Defendant replied "yes" to this question he admitted the claim. I agree with the Plaintiff when he argues that this is admitting the claim, except that the execution ought to wait.

But when on 15 June 201 6 I heard Defendants pleading that that was only a mistake on their part, the Court should understand the intention of the Defendants .

Nobody understands other people's intention except when they insist on some action, sometimes. The Defendants in this case insist on trial. This means that if this Court rushes an untried matter into finality, the process of justice may be hampered with objections that surface as preliminary objections or appeals.

So I would, in the interest of justice, have to punish the Defendants with costs of the action up to the hearing last week; then accept their defence.

The matter should proceed the normal way. The Plaintiff's application to enter judgment on admission is therefore declined. On the other hand the Defendant's mistake ought to be punished. I order the Defendant do pay the Plaintiffs costs of the action up to the time of the application.

MADE in chambers this 4th day of July 2016

NYAKWAWA USIWA

DEPUTY REGISTRAR