abdirahman mohamed mussa vs attorney general others 2022 tzhclandd 307 29 april 2022

abdirahman mohamed mussa vs attorney general others 2022 tzhclandd 307 29 april 2022

The applicant failed to establish the existence of a serious question to be tried and did not demonstrate that the balance of convenience or irreparable injury justified the grant of a temporary injunction. As the cumulative conditions for an interim injunction were not met, the application was dismissed.

Citation
abdirahman mohamed mussa vs attorney general others 2022 tzhclandd 307 29 april 2022
Parties
Applicant: Abdirahman Mohamed Mussa; 1st Respondent: The Honourable Attorney General; 2nd Respondent: Robert Moses (a personal Legal Representative of Charles Moses, the Deceased); 3rd Respondent: Dar es Salaam City Council
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
29 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Temporary Injunction
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunction, Interim Relief, Land Ownership, Execution Proceedings
Source Language
English
Land Law Civil Procedure Temporary Injunction Interim Relief Land Ownership Execution Proceedings

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdirahman Mohamed Mussa

Applicant

The Honourable Attorney General

1st Respondent

Robert Moses (a personal Legal Representative of Charles Moses, the Deceased)

2nd Respondent

Dar es Salaam City Council

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Temporary Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a temporary injunction restraining eviction and demolition pending determination of the intended suit

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish the existence of a serious question to be tried and did not demonstrate that the balance of convenience or irreparable injury justified the grant of a temporary injunction. As the cumulative conditions for an interim injunction were not met, the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for temporary injunction is dismissed with costs