20050224 TZHC Dar es Salaam

20050224 TZHC Dar es Salaam

Service of summons was not lawfully effected on the applicant as required by law, and the trial court erred by entering default judgment without ex parte proof of the claim, constituting material irregularity and illegality justifying revision.

Citation
20050224 TZHC Dar es Salaam
Parties
Applicant: Cocacola Kwanza Ltd; Respondent: Harid Mbonela; Respondent: Diwani Vesso; Respondent: John Mduma; Respondent: Francis Kwiyukwa; Respondent: Mbelwa Karuwani; Respondent: Deo Mushi; Respondent: Godwin Seleli; Respondent: Hajj Msamba; Respondent: Waziri Mdee
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Revision
Outcome
Application for revision granted
Legal Topics
Service of Summons, Default Judgment, Revisionary Powers, Ex Parte Proof
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Service of Summons Default Judgment Revisionary Powers Ex Parte Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cocacola Kwanza Ltd

Applicant

Harid Mbonela

Respondent

Diwani Vesso

Respondent

John Mduma

Respondent

Francis Kwiyukwa

Respondent

Mbelwa Karuwani

Respondent

Deo Mushi

Respondent

Godwin Seleli

Respondent

Hajj Msamba

Respondent

Waziri Mdee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Revision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of summons on the applicant was proper and lawful
  2. 2 Whether the trial court erred in entering default judgment without ex parte proof as required by law

Ratio Decidendi

Service of summons was not lawfully effected on the applicant as required by law, and the trial court erred by entering default judgment without ex parte proof of the claim, constituting material irregularity and illegality justifying revision.

Court Disposition

Application for revision granted

Orders

  • Case to be tried afresh before another magistrate of competent jurisdiction
  • Costs awarded to the applicants