ogilvy tanzania limited vs airtel tanzania and another 2020 tzhc 4353 11 december 2020

ogilvy tanzania limited vs airtel tanzania and another 2020 tzhc 4353 11 december 2020

The applicant's filing of materially different versions of the application and affidavit, both electronically and physically, constitutes a serious procedural irregularity and abuse of court process. The discrepancies were intentional and not curable by the overriding objective principle. The application is struck out for non-compliance with electronic filing rules. The application is not time-barred under Order I Rule 17, but the procedural irregularity is sufficient to dispose of the matter.

Citation
ogilvy tanzania limited vs airtel tanzania and another 2020 tzhc 4353 11 december 2020
Parties
Applicant/third Party: Ogilvy Tanzania Limited; 1st Respondent/defendant: Airtel Tanzania; 2nd Respondent/defendant: Ivanna Felix Teri
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
11 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection to Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application struck out
Legal Topics
Electronic Filing Irregularities, Extension of Time, Third Party Procedure, Preliminary Objection
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Electronic Filing Irregularities Extension of Time Third Party Procedure Preliminary Objection

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ogilvy Tanzania Limited

Applicant/third Party

Airtel Tanzania

1st Respondent/defendant

Ivanna Felix Teri

2nd Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection to Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application is an abuse of court process due to filing of inconsistent documents
  2. 2 Whether the application for extension of time is time-barred under the Civil Procedure Code

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's filing of materially different versions of the application and affidavit, both electronically and physically, constitutes a serious procedural irregularity and abuse of court process. The discrepancies were intentional and not curable by the overriding objective principle. The application is struck out for non-compliance with electronic filing rules. The application is not time-barred under Order I Rule 17, but the procedural irregularity is sufficient to dispose of the matter.

Court Disposition

Application struck out

Orders

  • Applicant's application is struck out for procedural irregularity and abuse of process.
  • Applicant is at liberty to file a fresh application within seven (7) days in conformity with electronic filing rules.