fred tungu mpendazoe vs the attorney general others 2011 tzhc 2034 16 september 2011

fred tungu mpendazoe vs the attorney general others 2011 tzhc 2034 16 september 2011

The petitioner complied with the court's order dated 6th June 2011; the change from 'officer' to 'individual' did not introduce a new ground or claim; the re-arrangement and renumbering of paragraphs did not violate the court's order; and paragraph 7.6 of the third edition is clear, precise, and does not prejudice the respondents' defence.

Citation
fred tungu mpendazoe vs the attorney general others 2011 tzhc 2034 16 september 2011
Parties
Petitioner: Fred Tungu Mpendazoe; 1st Respondent: The Attorney General; 2nd Respondent: Dr. Milton Makongoro Mahanga; 3rd Respondent: The Returning Officer, Segerea Constituency
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
16 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Preliminary objection overruled with costs to the petitioner.
Legal Topics
Election Petitions, Pleadings Amendment, Preliminary Objections, Compliance With Court Orders
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Election Law Election Petitions Pleadings Amendment Preliminary Objections Compliance With Court Orders

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fred Tungu Mpendazoe

Petitioner

The Attorney General

1st Respondent

Dr. Milton Makongoro Mahanga

2nd Respondent

The Returning Officer, Segerea Constituency

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third edition of the amended petition complied with the court's order dated 6th June 2011
  2. 2 Whether the change in description from 'officer' to 'individual' introduced a new ground or allegation
  3. 3 Whether re-arrangement and renumbering of paragraphs in the amended petition violated the court's order

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioner complied with the court's order dated 6th June 2011; the change from 'officer' to 'individual' did not introduce a new ground or claim; the re-arrangement and renumbering of paragraphs did not violate the court's order; and paragraph 7.6 of the third edition is clear, precise, and does not prejudice the respondents' defence.

Court Disposition

Preliminary objection overruled with costs to the petitioner.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection dismissed
  • Costs awarded to the petitioner