asm t ltd vs lusekelo mwakibete and another 2020 tzhc 1290 30 june 2020

asm t ltd vs lusekelo mwakibete and another 2020 tzhc 1290 30 june 2020

The applicant failed to account for each day of delay and did not demonstrate sufficient cause or illegality in the decision; production of EFD receipts is not mandatory in taxation of costs under the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015.

Citation
asm t ltd vs lusekelo mwakibete and another 2020 tzhc 1290 30 june 2020
Parties
Applicant: ASM (T) Limited; 1st Respondent: Lusekelo Mwakibete; 2nd Respondent: Sarah Diotrephes Mmari; 3rd Respondent: Francis Lukwaro
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
30 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Taxation of Costs, Advocates Remuneration Order, Proof of Disbursements
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Costs and Taxation Extension of Time Taxation of Costs Advocates Remuneration Order Proof of Disbursements

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ASM (T) Limited

Applicant

Lusekelo Mwakibete

1st Respondent

Sarah Diotrephes Mmari

2nd Respondent

Francis Lukwaro

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient reasons exist to grant extension of time to file reference
  2. 2 Whether the decision is tainted with serious illegalities warranting extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for each day of delay and did not demonstrate sufficient cause or illegality in the decision; production of EFD receipts is not mandatory in taxation of costs under the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for extension of time is dismissed
  • Applicant to pay costs