arcopar om sa vs harbert marwa family invstments co ltd others 2015 tzca 554 3 february 2015

arcopar om sa vs harbert marwa family invstments co ltd others 2015 tzca 554 3 february 2015

All preliminary objections lack merit: section 4(3) and Rule 65(1) allow revision by non-parties; non-compliance with Rule 12(4) is not fatal; omission of attesting officer's name in jurat is not an incurable defect per the most recent authority.

Citation
arcopar om sa vs harbert marwa family invstments co ltd others 2015 tzca 554 3 february 2015
Parties
Applicant: ARCO PAR (O.M.) S.A.; 1st Respondent: Harbert Marwa and Family Investments Co. Ltd; 2nd Respondent: Simon Decker; 3rd Respondent: Attorney General; 4th Respondent: Badar Seif Sood
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
3 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Application for Revision / Ruling on Preliminary Objections
Outcome
preliminary objections dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Revisional Jurisdiction, Locus Standi, Affidavit Defects, Court Procedure
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Property Law Revisional Jurisdiction Locus Standi Affidavit Defects Court Procedure

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ARCO PAR (O.M.) S.A.

Applicant

Harbert Marwa and Family Investments Co. Ltd

1st Respondent

Simon Decker

2nd Respondent

Attorney General

3rd Respondent

Badar Seif Sood

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application for Revision / Ruling on Preliminary Objections

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a non-party to lower court proceedings can apply for revision under section 4(3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act
  2. 2 Whether non-compliance with Rule 12(4) of the Court of Appeal Rules renders the application incompetent
  3. 3 Whether omission of attesting officer's name in the jurat of affidavit is a fatal defect

Ratio Decidendi

All preliminary objections lack merit: section 4(3) and Rule 65(1) allow revision by non-parties; non-compliance with Rule 12(4) is not fatal; omission of attesting officer's name in jurat is not an incurable defect per the most recent authority.

Court Disposition

preliminary objections dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for revision to be fixed for hearing on merit