19830706 TZHC Mwanza
The appellant was dismissed for breach of disciplinary code, and courts are prohibited from inquiring into such dismissals; the proper avenue for redress is through the Security of Employment Act and relevant labour authorities.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19830706 TZHC Mwanza
- Parties
- Appellant: Bi Taabu Msilanga; Respondent: Manager Tanganyika Bus Service Company
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 6 July 1983
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Civil Application / Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Termination of Employment, Terminal Benefits, Jurisdiction of Courts in Employment Matters
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Bi Taabu Msilanga
Appellant
Manager Tanganyika Bus Service Company
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is entitled to terminal benefits after dismissal for breach of disciplinary code
- 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to inquire into dismissals under the circumstances
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant was dismissed for breach of disciplinary code, and courts are prohibited from inquiring into such dismissals; the proper avenue for redress is through the Security of Employment Act and relevant labour authorities.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- No order for costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF T"NZANIA h.T MWANZA APPELLNIE JURISDICTION MISCo CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14 OF 1982 (Original Employment Ordinance No. 24 of 1981 RM'S at Mwanza - Bcfure E.::?.-Mtui -Resident Magistr;:-ite) Bi - Taabu Msilanga •• e o o • • • o • Appellant Versus Manager Tanganyika Bus Service Cpmpany or Respondent J U D G E ME N T !l:UNYERi',, J: The appellant was the plaintiff before the District Court of Mwanza. She sued her former employers, the Tanqanyika Bus Services Co., Ltd., herein referred to as the respondents. She sought to recover a total of Shs.11,608 made up of various items of terminal benefits and arrears of overtime pay for several ye2rs back. In her brief evidence She stated th3t the respondents h2d employed her since 1968. Her service was terminated on 15/5/81. The respondents paid her Shso2772/= annual leave pay but refused to ~ay her other benefits. She filed this suit to have the court compel the respondents to pay. In their defence th8y argued and pr6duced documenta·ry evidence, that the appellant Wes dismissed for breach of disciplinary code and was not entitled to any terminal benefitso The learned·;_ trial magistr.J.te upheld the respondent's defence .J.nd dismissed her claim. She brought this appeal. I flnd. no error in the e magistr • . - ... 9 te's pecision., ·. . The appellant \'lc.s dismissed and courts are forbidden from enquirying into such dismissals. The appellant shoulg.have been advised to pursue her rights in accordance with th~ $ecurity.of Employment Act. This is the res-ponsibilii:;¥ of .Juwata. and Labour 9fficials. The appeal is dismissect;.•-«N6 ·order 'for c'os'ts. :_.~_,;,.; ... '.'., . .., . ,... MWi,Nzt, - - F-. -AtNYERA '6/7/83'· J · ,.. ' JUDGE