20181213 TZCA Arusha

20181213 TZCA Arusha

The appellant failed to account for the period between the striking out of the previous application and the filing of the application for extension of time, thus not meeting the requirement to account for every day of delay. The High Court was wrong to disregard annexures for not being tendered, but the appeal fails on the substantive ground of unexplained delay.

Citation
20181213 TZCA Arusha
Parties
Appellant: Bruno Wenceslaus Nyalifa; 1st Respondent: The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs; 2nd Respondent: The Honorable Attorney General
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
13 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Affidavit Evidence, Procedure for Annexures, Delay and Limitation
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Extension of Time Judicial Review Affidavit Evidence Procedure for Annexures Delay and Limitation

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bruno Wenceslaus Nyalifa

Appellant

The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs

1st Respondent

The Honorable Attorney General

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in disregarding annexures to an affidavit for not being tendered as exhibits
  2. 2 Whether the appellant showed sufficient cause for extension of time to apply for judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to account for the period between the striking out of the previous application and the filing of the application for extension of time, thus not meeting the requirement to account for every day of delay. The High Court was wrong to disregard annexures for not being tendered, but the appeal fails on the substantive ground of unexplained delay.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Each party to bear its own costs