High Court allows Sata’s application in MPs case

High Court allows Sata’s application in MPs case
By Maluba Jere
Thu 03 Mar. 2011, 04:01 CAT

LUSAKA High Court judge Gregory Phiri has allowed Michael Sata's application to dismiss three consolidated actions for want of prosecution against the rebel members of parliament.

The rebel MPs who have since been expelled from the party had applied for an injunction restraining the PF from expelling them.

In this matter where PF leader Sata was sued in his capacity as party president together with former secretary general Edward Mumbi by the rebel parliamentarians, Judge Phiri dismissed the consolidated actions with costs to Sata to be taxed in default of the agreement.

Ruling on the matter, judge Phiri said he had no difficulty in concluding that all the three actions in the case could no longer be sustained in the form they were originally pleaded because the plaintiffs rebel parliamentarians neither took any further steps.

He said a glance at the record of proceedings under the three consolidated actions revealed that they may have completely been overtaken by numerous events which according to him, surprisingly none of the plaintiffs addressed their minds to.

Judge Phiri noted that Mumbi who was the first defendant in the case was no longer in the position in which he was sued.

He said none of the litigants had attempted to amend the pleadings in any way to incorporate the changes that had occurred over a period of time since the three consolidated actions were filed.

“Further still, there were never a stay of proceedings obtained in this case when the plaintiffs lodged their appeal to the Supreme Court in connection with the injunction order that was vacated by this court,” he said. “This notwithstanding, nothing else has been done to prosecute any of the claims on the part of the plaintiffs.”

Judge Phiri said the onus to amend the pleadings and address the issues of joinder or misjoinder had been on the plaintiffs throughout and that it was clear from the record that the plaintiffs had discharged this onus.

“I therefore agree with the learned counsel for the applicants that the
plaintiffs have not taken any steps to prosecute the three consolidated causes and they have not shown any intention to proceed any further,” he said.

According to an affidavit in support of the application to dismiss the action, none of the plaintiffs took any further steps to prosecute their claims and the inordinate delay had prejudiced the defendants.

But an affidavit in opposition stated among other things that Sata and Mumbi's application was made prematurely before the plaintiffs' appeal to the Supreme Court was heard.