My Two Cents: A Zambian Case Law Podcast

Law Issue in this case.This was a Constitutional matter before the High Court that was tasked with determining whether or not the President of the Republic of Zambia has the legitimate authority/power to issue directives to limit access to the usage of Public Owned Media Houses by opposition political parties. Brief Background to matter.The President of the Republic of Zambia in 1990, The late Dr. Kenneth David Kunda had, at a news conference, issued a directive that certain government owned newspapers were not to provide coverage to or accept advertisements from the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy (“MMD”), the main opposition political party at the time. The petitioners as a result of the said decision by the then President did herein apply to the High Court for on order quashing and setting aside the directive given by the President limiting access to Government owned media houses to the opposition, as it was the petitioners view that the said directive violated their rights in terms of article 22 and 25 of the Constitution of Zambia,1991. Kindly note that at 10:23 of this episode, the Host does make mention that the Constitutional Court has been given authority to adjudicate on Constitutional violation. Please be informed that the correct Constitutional provision is Article 128 of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment No.2 of 2016) .Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/my-two-cents-a-zambian-case-law-podcast--4068826/support.

The episode explains the changes that have been implemented so as to deliver a better podcast for the various listeners. In addition, this episode provides the listeners with an insight of the new addition features and changes that been applied to the podcast. If you have a case you would to be featured on the podcast ,get in touch with me through the details listed below. Email: georgemalipilo23@gmail.comFacebook Messenger: George Chintankwa Malipilo . Thankyou very much for taking the time to listen to the podcast.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/my-two-cents-a-zambian-case-law-podcast--4068826/support.

This is an Appeal from the Judgement of the Subordinate Court (Herein also known as the Magistrate Court) in which it found the Appellant guilty of the offence of defilement of a 7 year old Children .The High Court For Zambia which passed sentencing due to the limitation power of the Magistrate, give the offender, 25 Years imprisonment with Hard Labour . The Appellant now brought his matter before the Supreme Court of Zambia in a bid to overturn his conviction on the basis of inter alia (Among other thing) that the manner in how the Magistrate received was not correct as the voire dire was defective . Music by Bensound.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/my-two-cents-a-zambian-case-law-podcast--4068826/support.

This was an appeal from the Judgement of the High Court for Zambia that the Plaintiff having defaulted on the Loan agreement between itself and the Defendant . The Plaintiff therefore owed an outstanding amount of ZMW 36,642.71 and that the Defendant was within it's Contractual lane when it sold the Truck that had been placed as security for a Loan argreement of ZMW 45,000.00. According to the brief facts , Angel Musonda (The Appellant) had entered into a Loan argeement with Pulse Finance Services Limited (The Respondent) and had agreed to pay back the money in a period of 36 months .However, The Appellant seriously defaulted on her loan agreement and the Respondent seized the Truck and sold it for ZMW 20,000.00 so it could cover it's money . The Respondent got ZMW 17,000.00 The Appellant brought this matter to Court on the premise that it's was illegal for the Respondent to have sold the Truck as a result this lead to damages to the Appellant's business life , Angel Musonda therefore want the Court to order the Respondent to pay him damages to this effect . Music by Bensound ..Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/my-two-cents-a-zambian-case-law-podcast--4068826/support.

The issues that the Supreme Court of Zambia had to decided were; (i) Whether International Agreements that have not been domesticated despite been ratified and assented to by the State are applied in Zambia; and (ii) Whether Judges can cite International Agreements that are yet to be domesticated as an Act of Parliament . Music by BensoundBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/my-two-cents-a-zambian-case-law-podcast--4068826/support.

The Supreme Court of Zambia was asked by Appellant to decided as to whether the High-Court of Zambia had erred in Law by not following the case of Donoghue v Stevenson (English Judgement) by herein Stating that he did not consume the adulterated drink and such could not claim damages. Music from Bensound .Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/my-two-cents-a-zambian-case-law-podcast--4068826/support.

The Issue for determination before the Supreme Court of Zambia was whether Z.P.A Payment in lieu of Notice was unlawful and unjustified . The Second issue for determination before the Supreme Court of Zambia was In the event No Termination Period or Notice clause is expressed stated in the Contract of Employment . What will be the accepted or reasonable notice to give the employee about the termination of the employment ?Music from bensound.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/my-two-cents-a-zambian-case-law-podcast--4068826/support.