bertha urassa vs guiness kisanga and 4 others 2023 tzhc 21636 6 october 2023

bertha urassa vs guiness kisanga and 4 others 2023 tzhc 21636 6 october 2023

The applicant failed to account for all days of delay and did not provide sufficient evidence that illness was the sole reason for the inordinate delay. Technical delay applied only to certain periods, and the remaining unexplained delay constituted negligence. The application for extension of time was therefore...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
bertha urassa vs guiness kisanga and 4 others 2023 tzhc 21636 6 october 2023
Parties
Applicant: Bertha Urassa; Respondent: Guiness Kisanga; Respondent: Frank Stephen Mshana (As personal representative of the late Betty Lyamuya); Respondent: Rogathe Kisanga; Respondent: Absalum Benjamen; Respondent: Ansela Shirima
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
6 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Technical Delay, Sickness as Ground for Delay, Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Notice of Appeal
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Appellate Practice Extension of Time Technical Delay Sickness as Ground for Delay Appellate Jurisdiction Act Notice of Appeal

Source-derived case record

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 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bertha Urassa

Applicant

Guiness Kisanga

Respondent

Frank Stephen Mshana (As personal representative of the late Betty Lyamuya)

Respondent

Rogathe Kisanga

Respondent

Absalum Benjamen

Respondent

Ansela Shirima

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause for extension of time to file notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether technical delay and sickness constitute good cause for delay

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for all days of delay and did not provide sufficient evidence that illness was the sole reason for the inordinate delay. Technical delay applied only to certain periods, and the remaining unexplained delay constituted negligence. The application for extension of time was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

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