CIVIL APPLICATION NO 748 OF 2022 JACQUELINE NTUYABALIWE MENGI 3 OTHERS VS ABDIEL REGINALD MENGI 5 OTHERS

CIVIL APPLICATION NO 748 OF 2022 JACQUELINE NTUYABALIWE MENGI 3 OTHERS VS ABDIEL REGINALD MENGI 5 OTHERS

None of the grounds raised by the applicants constitute valid grounds for review under Rule 66(1); applicants' complaints are appeal grounds, not review grounds; no manifest error, deprivation of right to be heard, illegality, or lack of jurisdiction is established.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
CIVIL APPLICATION NO 748 OF 2022 JACQUELINE NTUYABALIWE MENGI 3 OTHERS VS ABDIEL REGINALD MENGI 5 OTHERS
Parties
1st Applicant: Jacqueline Ntuyabaliwe Mengi; 2nd Applicant: Jacqueline Ntuyabaliwe Mengi as next friend of Jayden Kihoza Mengi (A Minor); 3rd Applicant: Jacqueline Ntuyabaliwe Mengi as next friend of Ryan Saashisha Mengi (A Minor); 1st Respondent: Abdiel Reginald Mengi; 2nd Respondent: Benjamin Abraham Mengi; 3rd Respondent: Benson Benjamin Mengi; 4th Respondent: William Onesmo Mushi; 5th Respondent: Zoeb Hassuji; 6th Respondent: Sylvia Novatus Mushi
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Review of Court of Appeal Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Review Jurisdiction, Manifest Error, Right to Be Heard, Jurisdiction, Illegality of Decision
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Probate and Administration Review Jurisdiction Manifest Error Right to Be Heard Jurisdiction Illegality of Decision

Source-derived case record

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacqueline Ntuyabaliwe Mengi

1st Applicant

Jacqueline Ntuyabaliwe Mengi as next friend of Jayden Kihoza Mengi (A Minor)

2nd Applicant

Jacqueline Ntuyabaliwe Mengi as next friend of Ryan Saashisha Mengi (A Minor)

3rd Applicant

Abdiel Reginald Mengi

1st Respondent

Benjamin Abraham Mengi

2nd Respondent

Benson Benjamin Mengi

3rd Respondent

William Onesmo Mushi

4th Respondent

Zoeb Hassuji

5th Respondent

Sylvia Novatus Mushi

6th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Review of Court of Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether manifest error on the face of record resulted in miscarriage of justice
  2. 2 Whether applicants were deprived of right to be heard
  3. 3 Whether the decision was illegal

Ratio Decidendi

None of the grounds raised by the applicants constitute valid grounds for review under Rule 66(1); applicants' complaints are appeal grounds, not review grounds; no manifest error, deprivation of right to be heard, illegality, or lack of jurisdiction is established.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for review dismissed
  • No merits found in any grounds raised