20151130 tzhc arusha

20151130 tzhc arusha

The affidavit in support of the application was defective for containing hearsay evidence on material facts not within the deponent's personal knowledge and for failing to disclose the source of information in one paragraph; further, the affidavit lacked the mandatory endorsement of the drawer's name as required by law. These defects rendered the application incompetent and it was struck out with costs.

Citation
20151130 tzhc arusha
Parties
Petitioner: Dr. Steven Lemomo Kiruswa; 1st Respondent: Onesmo Nangole; 2nd Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General; 3rd Respondent: The Returning Officer for Longido Parliamentary Constituency
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
30 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Application struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Affidavit Defects, Hearsay Evidence, Security for Costs, Name of Drawer on Legal Documents
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Election Law Affidavit Defects Hearsay Evidence Security for Costs Name of Drawer on Legal Documents

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Steven Lemomo Kiruswa

Petitioner

Onesmo Nangole

1st Respondent

The Hon. Attorney General

2nd Respondent

The Returning Officer for Longido Parliamentary Constituency

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the affidavit in support of the application is incurably defective for being hearsay evidence
  2. 2 Whether the affidavit is defective for lack of the name of the drawer

Ratio Decidendi

The affidavit in support of the application was defective for containing hearsay evidence on material facts not within the deponent's personal knowledge and for failing to disclose the source of information in one paragraph; further, the affidavit lacked the mandatory endorsement of the drawer's name as required by law. These defects rendered the application incompetent and it was struck out with costs.

Court Disposition

Application struck out with costs

Orders

  • The application is struck out for being incompetent due to a defective affidavit.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.