20110930 TZCA Arusha1
- Citation
- 20110930 TZCA Arusha1
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZCA
- Decision
- 30 September 2011
- Posture
- Criminal Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Review
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZCA
- Decision
- 30 September 2011
- Posture
- Criminal Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Review
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application is incompetent because only the Full Court has jurisdiction to entertain it, not a single Justice.
Court disposition
Application struck out as incompetent
Orders
- Application is struck out
- Only Full Court has jurisdiction to entertain such applications
02
Material facts
Parties
Ally Mkombozi
ApplicantThe Republic
Respondent Counsel: Ms. Javelin Rugaihuruza03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Review
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether a single Justice of the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to entertain an application for extension of time to file review
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant explained the delay in making the application and sought extension of time to file review.
- Respondent
- The respondent opposed the application on the ground that a single Justice has no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Rule 62(1) of the Court Rules.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 62(1)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009
Jurisdiction to entertain applications for extension of time to file review lies with the Full Court, not a single Justice.
- 02
Article 123 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania
Article 123 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania governs the powers of a single Justice.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application is incompetent because only the Full Court has jurisdiction to entertain it, not a single Justice.
Court disposition
Application struck out as incompetent
- Application is struck out
- Only Full Court has jurisdiction to entertain such applications
Source and reliance status
TZCA · 30 September 2011
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZCA
Judgment· 30 September 2011
1
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA
J AT ARUSHA CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3 OF 2010 ALLY MKOMBOZI ............... ·............................................................... APPLICANT
VERSUS THE REPUBLIC .................................................................................... RESPONDENT (Application for extension of time to file review from decision of the Court of Appeal of-Tanzania at Arusha) (Kaii, J.A, Kileo,JA, And Kimaro, JA,) Dated 23 rd,24th day of April, 2004 in Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2007
I RULING 27 th & 30th September, 2011 NSEKELA, J.A.: Before this Court in Criminal Application No. 4 of 2008, Ally Mkombozi v The Director of Public Prosecutions (unreported) a single Justice of this Court (Mandia,J.A) struck out an application for extension of time to file an application for Revision. The powers of a single Justice to do so are contained in Article 123 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. The applicant, Ally Mkombozi, .. was dissatisfied with this decision and filed a Notice of Motion under Rule 48 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 (Court Rules). In his supporting affidavit, 2 the applicant attempted to explain the course of his delay to make the application. On her part, Ms. Javelin Rugaihuruza opposed the application, basically on the ground that in terms of Rule 62(1) of the Court Rules, a single justice of this court had no jurisdiction to entertain this application I am in respectful agreement with the learned State Attorney. Criminal Application No. 4 of 2004 was heard and determined by a single Justice of this court presumably under Rule 60(1) of the Court Rules. Since the applicant was dissatisfied with the decision of Mandia, J.A., his remedy was to invoke Rule 62(1)(a) of the Court Rules. The application is to be heard by the Full Court. This is also self-evident under Article 123 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. 3 In the result, the application before me is incompetent. The Full Court has the jurisdiction to entertain it and not a single Justice of this Court. It is accordingly ordered. DATED at ARUSHA this 28 th day of September, 2011. H.R. Nsekela
JUSTICE OF APPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original. ~ ¼~»:--:- ,. 4 ~==-------_) ~ E.Y. MKWIZU
DEPUTY REGISTRAR
COURT OF APPEAL
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.