Tanzania Judgment

TANZLII

cosmas yohana karadis vs cotex industries ltd 2021 tzhcld 462 12 novemba 2021

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The application was filed one day out of time, as the electronic filing occurred on 06/03/2021 instead of the required deadline of 05/03/2021. No leave for extension was sought. Therefore, the application is struck out for being filed out of time contrary to the statutory requirement.

Court disposition

Application struck out for being filed out of time.

Orders

  • Application is struck out for being filed out of time without leave of the court.

02

Material facts

Parties

Cosmas Yohana Karadis

Mleta Maombi Counsel: Sammy Katerega

Cotex Industries Limited

Mjibu Maombi Counsel: Paschal Mshanga

Amounts and remedies

  • Days Late in Filing: 1

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Maombi Ya Marejeo / Pingamizi La Awali

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The application was filed within time and received by the court on 04/03/2021, as evidenced by documents from the court registry. There is no clear procedure on when documents are stamped after receipt, and electronic filing should be recognized as the date of filing.
Respondent
The application was filed out of time, as the applicant received the award on 22/01/2021 and the six-week period expired on 05/03/2021. The application was filed on 09/03/2021, four days late, and no leave for extension was sought. Any matter filed out of time must be struck out without leave to refile.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 91(1)(a) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act, Cap 366

    Applications for review of arbitration awards must be filed within six weeks from the date of receipt of the award.

  2. 02

    Rule 21(1) of the Judicature and Application of Laws (Electronic Filing) Rules, 2018

    A document is considered filed if submitted through the electronic filing system before midnight on the date of submission, unless otherwise specified by the court.

  3. 03

    Wambele Mtumwa Shaban v. Mohamed Hamis, Civil Reference No. 08 of 2016

    Delay of even a single day is a delay and applications filed out of time without leave must be struck out.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The application was filed one day out of time, as the electronic filing occurred on 06/03/2021 instead of the required deadline of 05/03/2021. No leave for extension was sought. Therefore, the application is struck out for being filed out of time contrary to the statutory requirement.

Court disposition

Application struck out for being filed out of time.

  • Application is struck out for being filed out of time without leave of the court.

Source and reliance status

TANZLII · 1 January 2021

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.

Source document

TANZLII

Judgment· 1 January 2021

cosmas yohana karadis vs cotex industries ltd 2021 tzhcld 462 12 novemba 2021

MAHAKAMA KUU YA TANZANIA

DIVISHENI YA KAZI

DAR ES SALAAM MAOMBI YA MAREJEO NA. 86 YA 2021

KATI YA

COSMAS YOHANA KARADIS MLETA MAOMBI

DHIDI YA

COTEX INDUSTRIES LIMITED MJIBU MAOMBI

UAMUZI MDOGO Tarehe ya Amri ya Mwisho: 28/09/2021 Tarehe ya Uamuzi: 12/11/2021 I. Arufani, J, Huu ni uamuzi unaotokana na pingamizi la awali (hapa utajulikana kama pingamizi) lililowasilishwa na mjibu maombi katika mahakama hii akieleza kwamba, maombi haya ya marejeo yaliyoko mbele ya mahakama hii yamewasilishwa katika mahakama hii nje ya Wakati wa kusikiliza pingamizi hili mjibu maombi aliwakilishwa na Wakili Paschal Mshanga, wakati mleta maombi aliwakilishwa na Bwana Sammy Katerega, Mwakilishi Binafsi. Wakili Mshanga aliieleza mahakama kwamba ni matakwa ya kisheria katika fungu la 91 (1) (a) la Sheria ya Ajira na Mahusiano Kazini, Sura ya 366 kama ilivyorejewa mwaka 2019 kwamba, maombi ya marejeo ya tuzo toka tume yanapaswa yafunguliwe mahakama kuu ndani ya wiki sita tangu tuzo hiyo ilipowasilishwa kwa mteja. Alieleza kumbukumbu zinaonyesha kwamba mleta maombi alipokea nakala ya tuzo toka tume kupitia muwakilishi wake aitwaye Nehemia Munga mnamo tarehe 22/01/2021. Alisema ukihesabu kuanzia tarehe hiyo ya kupokea tuzo wiki sita zinaishia tarehe 05/03/2021. Alesema maombi haya yalifunguliwa mahakamani mnamo tarehe 09/03/2021 ikiwa zimepita siku nne (4) tangu tarehe ya mwisho kuwasilisha maombi haya. Akaeleza kuwa mleta maombi hakuomba ridhaa yoyote ya mahakama kuleta maombi haya nje ya muda. Ilielezwa zaidi na Wakili wa mjibu maombi kuwa, ni kanuni ya kisheria kuwa shauri

lolote linalofunguliwa nje ya muda linatakiwa kufutwa bila ruhusa ya kulirejesha tena mahakamani, alielekeza ' \ .I mahakama kwenye shauri la Tanesco v. Bakari Mayombo [2015] LCCD ambapo Mhe. Aboud, J. alitumia kanuni ya 55 (1) ya Kanuni za Mahakama ya Kazi na kifungu cha 3 (1) cha Sheria ya Ukomo wa muda kufutilia mbali shauri hilo. Kutilia msisitizo msimamo huo, Wakili Mshanga alirejea shauri la Barclays Bank Tanzania Ltd. v. Phylisiah Hussein Mcheni, Civil Appeal No. 19/2016. Wakili Mshanga alimalizia kwa kuiomba mahakama hii kufutilia mbali 2 maombi haya bila ruhusa ya kuyarejesha tena mahakamani kwa sababu, yaliwasilishwa mhakamani nje ya muda uliyowekwa kisheria bila ya ridhaa ya Mahakama. Akijibu hoja za pingamizi hilo, Bwana Katerega alieleza kuwa, maombi haya yalifunguliwa ndani ya muda unaotakiwa kisheria na kupokelewa na mahakama hii tarehe 04/03/2021. Alisema hiyo ill inathibitishwa kwa nakala alizozipokea kutoka katika mahakama hii na nakala hizo zilipelekwa kwa Naibu Msajili tarehe 06/03/2021. Alieleza zaidi kuwa walipewa taarifa kuwa nyaraka zimepokelewa hivyo walete nyaraka halisi zilizopokelewa na kugongwa muhuri tarehe 09/03/2021. Bwana katerega aliendelea kueleza kwamba, bahati mbaya ni kwamba hakuna utaratibu uliowekwa na mahakama kuwa baada ya kupokelewa nakala hizo za maombi zinagongwa muhuri wa tarehe gani. Kwamba, kwa mujibu wa kanuni ya 8 (1) (c) ya

Kanuni za Mahakama ya kazi, inaruhusu kuwasilisha maombi kwa njia ya barua pepe kwa Naibu Msajili na inaonekana wazi ni tarehe ipi inachukuliwa kuwa ni tarehe ya kupokea maombi. Maombi yakipokelewa kwa njia ya barua pepe hiyo ndiyo inachukuliwa kuwa ni tarehe ambayo maombi yalipokelewa mahakamani. 3 Bwana Katerega alimalizia kwa kuiomba Mahakama izingatie nyaraka zilizotolewa mahakamani, na kuruhusu maombi haya yaendelee kusikilizwa ili mleta maombi asiadhibiwe kwa kosa ambalo si la kwake. Katika mawasilisho ya nyongeza, mjibu maombi alieleza kwamba nyaraka iliyotolewa na muwakilishi wa mleta maombi kuonyesha kuwa maombi haya yaliwasilishwa kwa njia ya barua pepe haiaminikii kutokana na kutoonyesha ni wapi alikoipata. Pia alipaswa ku wapatia nyaraka hiyo wakati alipowasilisha nyaraka za maombi If w 1 lakini kaileta baada ya pingamizi kutolewa mahakamani. Zaidi alieleza kwamba, hata kama nyaraka hiyo itazingatiwa bado inaonyesha kwamba shauri hili liliwasilishwa tarehe 06/03/2021 . % ambayo bado ni nje ya muda. Kwamba kwa mujibu wa waraka namba 148 wa mwaka 2018 tarehe ya kupokea shauri ni ile ya kuwasilisha shauri mahakamani. Pia Bwana Katerega hajaeleza ni barua pepe gani aliyoitumia kwa Naibu Msajili ili kuwasilisha maombi hayo. Wakili Mshanga alisisitiza wapewe nafuu alizoziomba katika mawasilisho yake ya awali. 4 Baada ya kutafakari kwa kina mawasilisho ya kutoka pande

zote mbili kuhusu pingamizi la awali lilowasilishwa na mjibu maobi katika shauri hili mahakama imeona kwamba, kama ilivyo wasilishwa na wakili wa mjibu maombi, maombi ya marejeo ya uamuzi wa tume yanapaswa kufunguliwa katika mahakama hii ndani ya wiki sita toka tarehe ambayo tuzo imepokelewa na mdaawa kama ilivyoainishwa katika fungu la 91 (1) (a) la Sheria ya Ajira na Mahusiano Kazini, na kusisitizwa na Mahakama ya Rufani katika shauri la Serengeti Breweries Ltd. v. Joseph Boniface, Civil Appeal No. 150/2015 CAT (Unreported). Katika kumbukumbu za shauri hili, ni wazi kuwa mleta maombi alipokea Nakala ya tuzo tarehe 22/01/2021 hivyo alipaswa kuwasilishwa maombi yake ya marejeo katika mahakamani hii si zaidi % jV 1 ya tarehe 05/03/2021. Baada ya Mahakama kupitia nyaraka za shauri hili hasa nyaraka ambayo iliwasilishwa mahakamani na mwakilishi wa mleta maombi ili kuthibitisha kuwa maombi haya yaliwasilishwa ndani ya muda, imeona kwamba kupitia nyaraka hiyo maombi haya yaliwasilishwa mahakamani kwa njia ya mtandao tarehe 06/03/2021 saa 02:32:12 asubuhi na sio tarehe 04/03/2021 kama alivyoeleza mwakilishi wa mwombaji. Aidha aliwasilisha nakala ngumu za maombi 5 hayo katika masjala ya mahakama hii tarehe 09/03/2021 kama ilivyo utaratibu. Mahakama ya Tanzania inatambua njia ya mtandao kama moja ya njia za kufungua shauri mahakamani. Kanuni ya 21 (1) ya Sheria ya Judicature and

Application of Laws (Electronic filling) Rules, 2018 inaeleza kwamba, nyaraka inatambulika kuwa imekwisha sajiliwa pale inapokuwa imewasilishwa kwa njia ya kieletroniki. Kwa ufafanuzi zaidi kanuni hiyo inaeleza kama ifuatavyo:- A document shall be considered to have been filed if it is submitted through the electronic filing system before midnight, East African time, on the date it is submitted, unless specific time is set by the court or it is rejected.' % % Bwana Katerega ameeleza katika mawasilisho yake kuwa, I. " , maombi haya yalifunguliwa ndani ya muda yaani tarehe 04/03/2021. Kama ilivyolezwa na wakili wa mjibu maombi maelezo yake sio sahihi kwa kuwa nyaraka aliyoileta mahakamani kuthibitisha kufungua shauri hili kwa njia ya kieletroniki inaonyesha kuwa maombi haya ya marejeo namba 86 ya mwaka 2021 yalifunguliwa tarehe 06/03/2021 na sio tarehe 04/03/2021 kama alivyowasilisha mwakilishi wa mleta maombi. 6 Kwa msingi huo ni wazi kuwa maombi haya yaliwasilishwa mahakamani nje ya muda kwa kuchelewa kwa siku moja. Na mleta maombi hakuomba ruhusa ya mahakama kuwasilisha maombi yake nje ya muda. Pamoja ni kuwa mleta maombi alichelewa kwa siku moja kuwasilisha maombi yake katika mahakama lakini kama ilivyoelezwa na Mahakama ya Rufani katika shauri la Wambele zJC % Mtumwa Shaban V. Mohamed Hamis, Civil Reference No. 08 of 2016 mahakama zetu zimekuwa zikisisitiza kwamba kuchelewa

hata kwa siku moja ni kuchelewa {delay of even a single day is a delay). Hivyo maombi haya yanaonekana hayako mahakamani kwa A usahihi kwa sababu yalifunguliwa mahakamani nje ya muda uliowekwa kisheria bila ya ridhaa ya mahakama. Kwa maelezo hayo ni kwamba pingamizi la mjibu maombi linakubaliwa na maombi haya Wk ® Wk yanafutiliwa mbali kwa kuwasilishwa mahakamani nje ya muda unaotakiwa kisheria. Imeamriwa hivyo. Wk Imewekwa saini hapa Dar es Salaam leo tarehe 12 ya Mwezi Novemba, 2021. I. Arufani

JAJI 12/11/2021 7 Mahakama: Uamuzi mdogo umesomwa leo tarehe 12 mwezi wa Novemba, 2021 akiwepo Bw. Sammy Katerega, Mwakilishi wa Mleta Maombi na akiwepo Bw. Paschal Mshanga, Wakili wa Mjibu Maombi. Haki ya kukata rufaa kwenda Mahakama ya Rufani imeelezwa. 8

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Tanesco v. Bakari Mayombo [2015] LCCD

Case cited

Barclays Bank Tanzania Ltd. v. Phylisiah Hussein Mcheni, Civil Appeal No. 19/2016

Case cited

Serengeti Breweries Ltd. v. Joseph Boniface, Civil Appeal No. 150/2015 CAT (Unreported)

Case cited

Wambele Mtumwa Shaban v. Mohamed Hamis, Civil Reference No. 08 of 2016

Case cited

Employment and Labour Relations Act, Cap 366

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Judicature and Application of Laws (Electronic Filing) Rules, 2018

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Law of Limitation Act

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.