augustino kabalula 5 others vs morogoro plastic limited another 2023 tzhcld 1392 14 august 2023

augustino kabalula 5 others vs morogoro plastic limited another 2023 tzhcld 1392 14 august 2023

Applicants failed to adduce good reasons for the delay and did not account for each day of the delay; prosecution of execution proceedings does not constitute sufficient ground for extension of time; application is unmerited and constitutes abuse of court process.

Citation
augustino kabalula 5 others vs morogoro plastic limited another 2023 tzhcld 1392 14 august 2023
Parties
Applicant: Augustino Kabalula; Applicant: Epaflasi Lukasi Masonda; Applicant: Mohamed Said Mtonya; Applicant: Mohamedi Abdallah Tindwa; Applicant: Severine Petro Masika; Applicant: Winfred Beno Milinga; Respondent: Morogoro Plastic Limited; Respondent: B.H. Ladwa Limited
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
14 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Unfair Termination, Revision of Arbitral Award, Abuse of Court Process
Source Language
English
Labour Law Extension of Time Unfair Termination Revision of Arbitral Award Abuse of Court Process

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Augustino Kabalula

Applicant

Epaflasi Lukasi Masonda

Applicant

Mohamed Said Mtonya

Applicant

Mohamedi Abdallah Tindwa

Applicant

Severine Petro Masika

Applicant

Winfred Beno Milinga

Applicant

Morogoro Plastic Limited

Respondent

B.H. Ladwa Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants have adduced sufficient reasons for delay in filing revision application
  2. 2 Whether applicants have accounted for each day of delay
  3. 3 Whether prosecution of execution proceedings constitutes good cause for extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants failed to adduce good reasons for the delay and did not account for each day of the delay; prosecution of execution proceedings does not constitute sufficient ground for extension of time; application is unmerited and constitutes abuse of court process.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • application for extension of time dismissed
  • no costs awarded due to labour dispute