Barrigas Building Contractors Ltd v Trustees of Tea Research Foundation (Central Africa) (Civil Cause 2086 of 1994) [1995] MWHCCiv 7 (27 September 1995)

IN THE HIGH COUH. T OF MALWI PRINCIPAL REGISTRY CIVIL CAUSE NO. 2086 OF 1994 B /\Hi { H;J\S hU 1 LU l NG CUN 'l'JV\C'l'l) H. S L. LMl'l 'J.:: U •. 'l'I WS' ['L•; J:::S UF 'l'L·J1 F ULJf~JJ i\ '1'1 U N ( C t:;N'l'HAL AF lUC/1) l< LSl:J1l<C l l /\ l,U .• l:-'Li\l N 'l' l FF •• U EFL:: N IJ I \ I\J 'l' COR.'\M: f·Z:. IL f'lzikai 11d 11d c1 , Senior u c~LJ ur. y J{cyist.r uc .. ,:,,, M1· · f"lsisha, for c hc LJ l,, .int. i f f ~~rr· / 'l'!H ~ defc· nd a nl c1 1:-i LJ l i cs t u hc1ve: dcf a u.l t 'l' he at) iJ l i ca t j on .i '.:; op 1J o s cu . RULING • , '~~, Lit?'?.~ ··-.....,. . ' ,,/ /-1 •H------~· .. . . Judgrn0.11t sc't: o ~½id c~ . t hey sccvc a d ef e nce E1f . L n s L c a u fJLh 'l' l 1c def e nd a n t. d i d not i1wir.a t c an .intent .ion Lo d o f E: n cl nor t c!r s ervice uf wcit of su11111 1o ns 0 11 j u d y 111 c n t w a s a JL wa'.-; only <.'ifl~cr the ju uy 111 c~ nl. Lh a t .in ,:i c t. i o n . in a un wock 1no r1 li k e' thc.i r L e y d l LJrdct. i tionori.; . I. h ey w co t c l. <:JS/'5 . a goo cJ u c f c n c c r11r Mas u ml. Ju sul_J lll.i t s cl e f c n u a n t: s 1\ Li c f a u .l l~ J c l. r c c . to t h c t-1arct1 , ll a v c t 17 c tlic wock wc:.1s do n e t h e clcfcnuonts are c n t. it.lcu to iJ a d v.i s e d t. h a t a.id l. h e rn . e n t e red o n t.1 1c y c f f e c: t. 'l'h e: def e nce al l c gca t. 1,at-. 111a nn c r and tll c r e r oc e th a t ci e u u cl ion . i:J ra y t h a t a JJow e Li l t .is .1 n t. h c~ u e f a u J t. these j u u g III c n t. r.irc:u111st a n ccs Ii e r c 1 n b e cJ cf c 11uanls t l w y b c to serve a defence . s t) t a s i de a n c. J t.hat. the t::. h a t t. h c r c~ cann ot r egular t o havt' judgr11 e nL. t hc.i r pacl. . t hat j ~, L Ii a t H r Msisha ccsis L ccJ rec1sons for se e king ju~gmcnt set: asiclc cJCc f a r i ncocJocaLcci cnti l~y fro111 b c .iny a cJec,1u ate. a nu the ap 1;lir.cJt.ion. The dt~faulL judy111 c nt 1 s a the~ 'J'l, c ucf ault_ 'l'n c~ a l l ege de fencJcJn t. i;{ a n L il ey The court~ wo ul c.i h a ve been ac. Jv a n tageu 1y n or anc c on . Lt i s no t e11 o uyh to i f r. hc µ r o fcss e d ucfcnc e we r e put. forward . Ill c c i t. s w j t 11 o u t. 111 a kc a n a s s c c t j o n i s a c on d cccnc.li n g o n U1c) fact. sa n d lay <..!own the full subsL a rict~ of t he t.hcrc .i s d u are Liofc nc c i n u 11 w u 1 k m a 11 a s s c r L j o 11 J i kc man n ee and t. lic dcfcnda1 1t.s n a v e 1H' C'S Ullidbly llladc d u ni ] a t. era ] t h e Lcrrns of t h e con tract arc Li cdu c:t Jun . .in wll aL way a n u l t 1s <..lc d u c:Lcd was 11o t a r t· i v (~ u o f th C) u r ucr L 3 ap~ Jir.ation ciocs not. c:0 11 stit:. utc mc~ritor .i o u s defence . a s i de a p o j n L t h c ,- e t h a t J n r 9 S u b - l 4 j u ug me nt i f the cl e f e nd a n l . s h qV(n o u e fcnr. c . 1 t must LJ o t h have a re al µrosp e ct of suc:r. c ss and so111c degree uf s uc cess . ln t hi s r. a sc the cJcfcncc i gnorcu the writ . • v,0 1· J<. wa s done _in un wo rkrna nl.i k e ma n nct· . t. l1 c lx ~i n y co n t. encJc d . L. h e t)LJ i l u i 11 y con t . r a c t w d s c x cc u t e d s how n a t Par a g r a 1) h l t i s n ot. s huv-m what figur e K2U , l4 c5 . lo a f f i c. J a v i t Hl l n L his cuse cJ c.>f' c n c (~ o t1 s c t t. i n y s u tJ lJ or t s t. <l r_ e s t o be 0 of l h c h ow t.h e t~ h e 1 s n o - - d tl .1:; i s reyul21c judgt11cnt. . .i ss u e I t .i s usu a .l tl 1a l: ary ua ul e .i n supµ or t o f ~\/here~ a cicfa ul l J agree t: hat .i t t h c a p p 1 i c a t· 1 o 11 • that_ \✓ licc c .it is av crc u 'c'that thc'CC' .it scL as j <le 111usL s how a Lei z1LJ I c! .is n o t c11 ouy l1 b. LJl) l jca t ion to j ss u(~ or a uc f c~ncc on ho.vc~ t.hc l:o 1nc.rc~ly , ii vcr th at. Lhcre merits . tiic 111cr i ts 'wi t h out sllo,✓ .i ny is an arg u al. JJc. issue or a dch'nc~: o n u.c w.il .. l1 o ul s how j ng . t il e dc~fc~ncc on wJ-1at the 111c'r1ts . c1 clef cncc on U1e me r j t.s u p cof C'S ,; c•cl de f cnr. e is exhi b j Lc~Cl wi t.l1 t I l(' t h .i s ca s (~ no s u c ll a f f .i u av j t defence ha s bcc~n t:o a lott<~c dJlegccl l y writ.te n by jJlcJ .in l...iff fol lowing Th at. ) (' 1. U~r has 110t ' b Pe n cxl1il;iled . serv i r.c of writ of ~.; u11 111 1u ns . the aff .ic. Javj t. Look i ng at Para9r ap h t-.lw t h,1t t. h c defe nd ant clc~nies owing as rnucll app l.ir.ation i t as cJ lo l; c c.icd ur.l:.ion of K2U ,l4 B-ltL 1s an c. Jcc. J u r.tcu wos arriv(:d a t . . then~ j s a uef c~11cc on .i ss u c . t hat. ar (j u ab l c the merits . I fjn d no leya.l bas is f or s e tt: in g asjclc the d e fault judgme nt h ere in. The jucJyrncnt- mus t st.anl.i a nd the at,1p l .ic atjon to set il as.ide rnusL be u i s rniss el.1 wit h cosL.s . l t is not shown h ow n o l there rnu~;L be t llj s su111 tlic~r e The (c 1 s I.l i e d ef c n cla n Ls Lo 5 1. U . ':Jl and in tf~ res t am n ot. pu rs ua ded .in su1)port ther eo n and show n Lha l· E.' Xt1i l Jit.cu . refer"cnc~ r. J c<1r l t 1 s . K.334 , iJ of tha t t-.1 1c) of .i s . L n j~ ; l 1"12-1elc 1n Charnbcr-s t. hi ~, Blant.yn!. 27t~h uay of Sc~ 1) te mb(~c , l'. J9S at /, 1t . H _;J~ SENIOR REGISTRAR /