Recourse to the national Courts of Malawi 21 . To vindicate the alleged violation of his rights, the AppHcant turned to various courts in Malawi. 22. The Applicant lodged a case in the High Court against the University of Malawi for, amongst others, his reinstatement. In its judgment dated 27 November 2003, the High Court found that the Applicant had not been given a fair hearing to defend himself against the adverse report, and therefore that his dismissal was wrongful. The Court, however, held that he could not be reinstated . It ordered that he be given a further 2 month's payment (the University had on its own already paid him for one month); the order was to put him in the same position as if a three months' notice had been given . Furthermore, the High Court awarded the Applicant damages for wrongful dismissal, the quantum of which would have to be established before the Registrar of that Court. 23. The University appealed against the above judgment to the Malawi Supreme Court of Appeal. One of the grounds of appeal was that the High Court had erred in awarding damages to the Applicant for the wrongful dismissal in addition to the three months' notice pay awarded to him. The Supreme Court of Appeal , in its judgment dated 12 July 2004, held that the High Court erred in awarding the damages for wrongful dismissal, over and above the three months' pay award. It ruled that if the Applicant had "desired to contend that rules of natural justice were not observed by the University when terminating his employment, he was perfectly entitled to have appro r-iatelr............stated the (101