LILONGWE-(MaraviPost)-The High Court of Malawi has discharged leave for judicial review and lifted a stay of suspension in the case involving former Blantyre Water Board CEO Yeremia Chihana, ruling that the dispute is primarily an employment matter that should be handled by the Industrial Relations Court.
In a ruling delivered in Chambers on 19th May 2026, Justice Allan Hans Muhome held that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to proceed with the matter as it centred on private rights arising from Chihana’s contract of employment rather than the exercise of public power.
Chihana had accepted the position of Chief Executive Officer for Blantyre Water Board on 8th April 2026. On 27th April 2026, the Board suspended him pending investigations over allegations that he made public pronouncements without board approval, permitted an unauthorized person access to official premises and documents, and caused the arrest of some directors contrary to a board resolution.
The High Court had earlier granted Chihana leave to apply for judicial review and a stay of the suspension, without notice to the Board.
The court also ordered the Board to disclose certain documents related to the allegations, a matter that is subject to separate contempt proceedings.
Blantyre Water Board applied to discharge the leave and stay, arguing that the dispute was an employer-employee issue that ought to have been commenced in the Industrial Relations Court.
The Board’s counsel cited precedent from Nathan Mpinganjira v The State & Malawi Development Corporation, the Kamwenda Case, and Makhasu v Blantyre Water Board to support the position.
Chihana’s legal team contended that the case warranted judicial review, relying on cases involving public offices and administrative fairness, including Ridge v Baldwin and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody.
In his ruling, Justice Muhome said the court was guided by the “dominant factor” principle, which requires that where a case mixes private and public law elements, the court must determine the predominant issue.
He found that the dominant factor here was employment.
“The Court considers that the dominant factor in the present matter is the employment aspect,” the judge stated.
He noted that Malawi’s legal system had established specialised courts to deal with labour matters and that the High Court should not be inundated with such cases at first instance.
The judge also referenced a prior observation by Hon. Kapanda J. that “the Applicant does not have an arguable case for judicial review. The dominant factor in this case is that the Applicant wants to enforce private rights under the private law of employment.”
Consequently, the court discharged the permission for judicial review and the stay of suspension. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.
The ruling reinforces the distinction between administrative law and employment law in Malawi, and signals that employment-related disputes involving statutory bodies will generally be directed to the Industrial Relations Court unless they involve clear issues of public power or constitutional rights.
Leave a Reply