Judge Situmbeko Chocho rules that Hon. Mundubile must join himself to the earlier case of Raphael Nakacinda Vs. Miles Sampa, refuses to grant him Injunction

By Amb. Emmanuel Mwamba
Judge Situmbeko Chocho rules that Hon. Mundubile must join himself to the earlier case of Raphael Nakacinda Vs. Miles Sampa, refuses to grant him Injunction

COURT DECISION
5.1
The clear and undisputed facts are that the 2nd Defendant (Miles Sampa) did call
for an Extra Ordinary Convention at which he was elected The Party
president, it is not for me at this point to consider the alleged
illegality of the calling and undertakings of the said convention.

5.2 The facts surrounding this matter are similar to the facts under
cause 2023/HP/1866, which cause is before this Court. I find that
the issues, facts and most importantly question of the provisions of
the Patriotic Front Party Constitution, the alleged illegality of the Extra-Ordinary Ordinary Conference Convention are similar in the two
matters/ actions.

The relief claimed in both these matters arise out
of the same transaction or event.

5.3 The circumstances of the matters make it difficult for me to order for the consolidation of the matters without the consent of the
Parties by reason of the existence of the following points/issues;

1. Different Law firms representing the Plaintiffs and Defendants
in both matters.

2. The Party as Plaintiff in the Cause 2023/HP/1866 is actually
a Defendant under this cause.

Be that as it may, I shall pursuant to Order 4 Rule 9 of the Rules of
the Supreme Court (1999 Edition) and Order 3 Rule 2
of the High Court Rules Cap 27 of the Laws of Zambia, order the
Stay of the proceedings under this Cause 2023/HP/1899 pending
the determination of Cause under 2023/HP/1866.

6. CONCLUSION
With the above in mind I cannot consider the application for an
Injunction in this Cause. Staying these proceedings in view of the
other matter under cause 2023/HP/1866 is NOT prejudicial but meant for orderly discharge of justice.

I must for the record state that Counsel owes a very important and cardinal duty to the Court and should not be seen to aid
Parties/Clients in abusing Court process or indeed withholding
critical information from the Court.

The relief of Injunction is an equitable relief and it is a basic yet fundamental principle that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands.

An injunction as an equitable remedy cannot be
employed in a manner that encourages a multiplicity of actions.

In conclusion the following is my decision or Order:

The proceedings under Cause Number 2023/HP/1899 is hereby stayed pending the determination o f Cause
2023/HP/1866.

The Plaintiff is at liberty to apply for
joinder under causc 2023/HP/1866.

6.4.1.2 Costs in the cause.