bernard william vs nickolaus myefu others 2022 tzhc 10585 3 june 2022

bernard william vs nickolaus myefu others 2022 tzhc 10585 3 june 2022

The applicant failed to account for the 22 days of delay after the previous application was struck out, and the alleged illegality was not sufficiently particularized or apparent on the face of the record; thus, no sufficient cause was demonstrated for extension of time.

Citation
bernard william vs nickolaus myefu others 2022 tzhc 10585 3 june 2022
Parties
Applicant: Bernard William; Respondent: Nickolaus Myefu; Respondent: Pili Daimon Mwakaila; Respondent: Godlove Mbwanji; Respondent: Edward Mdoe
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
3 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals, Sufficient Cause for Delay, Illegality as Ground for Extension
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Extension of Time Appeals Sufficient Cause for Delay Illegality as Ground for Extension

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bernard William

Applicant

Nickolaus Myefu

Respondent

Pili Daimon Mwakaila

Respondent

Godlove Mbwanji

Respondent

Edward Mdoe

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to appeal
  2. 2 Whether alleged illegality in the tribunal's decision constitutes sufficient reason for extension

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for the 22 days of delay after the previous application was struck out, and the alleged illegality was not sufficiently particularized or apparent on the face of the record; thus, no sufficient cause was demonstrated for extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

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