arusha city council vs nmk project services 2020 tzhccomd 2026 12 february 2020

arusha city council vs nmk project services 2020 tzhccomd 2026 12 february 2020

Citing the wrong enabling provision (Rule 31(2) instead of Rule 43(2)) to set aside an ex parte judgment renders the application incompetent, as the court is not properly moved to grant the relief sought.

Citation
arusha city council vs nmk project services 2020 tzhccomd 2026 12 february 2020
Parties
Applicant: Arusha City Council; Respondent: NMK Project Services
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
12 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Commercial Application / Preliminary Objection on Enabling Provision for Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment
Outcome
Application struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment, Proper Citation of Enabling Provision, High Court (commercial Division) Procedure Rules
Source Language
English

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arusha City Council

Applicant

NMK Project Services

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Commercial Application / Preliminary Objection on Enabling Provision for Setting Aside Ex Parte Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the application to set aside ex parte judgment was brought under the correct enabling provision of law
  2. 2 Whether citing a wrong provision renders the application incompetent

Ratio Decidendi

Citing the wrong enabling provision (Rule 31(2) instead of Rule 43(2)) to set aside an ex parte judgment renders the application incompetent, as the court is not properly moved to grant the relief sought.

Court Disposition

Application struck out with costs

Orders

  • The application is struck out with costs.