chavda company advocates vs arunaben chaggan chhita mistry others 2017 tzca 154 22 may 2017

chavda company advocates vs arunaben chaggan chhita mistry others 2017 tzca 154 22 may 2017

The Court held that the applicant was condemned to pay costs for alleged negligence without being given an opportunity to be heard, in violation of the constitutional right to a fair hearing. The punitive order was therefore a nullity and had to be set aside. Inconsequential defects in the affidavit did not warrant...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
chavda company advocates vs arunaben chaggan chhita mistry others 2017 tzca 154 22 may 2017
Parties
Applicant: Chadha and Company Advocates; 1st Respondent: Arunaben Chaggan Chhita Mistry; 2nd Respondent: Mr. Naushad Mohamedhussein; 3rd Respondent: Mr. Mohamedraza Mohamedhussein
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
22 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Application for Review / Judgment on Application for Review of Court of Appeal Ruling
Outcome
Application for review granted in part; punitive costs order against applicant set aside; each party to bear own costs.
Legal Topics
Right to Be Heard, Costs Orders Against Advocates, Review of Appellate Decisions, Natural Justice
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Right to Be Heard Costs Orders Against Advocates Review of Appellate Decisions Natural Justice

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chadha and Company Advocates

Applicant

Arunaben Chaggan Chhita Mistry

1st Respondent

Mr. Naushad Mohamedhussein

2nd Respondent

Mr. Mohamedraza Mohamedhussein

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application for Review / Judgment on Application for Review of Court of Appeal Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was wrongly deprived of the right to be heard before being condemned to pay costs for alleged negligence
  2. 2 Whether the affidavit in support of the application was fatally defective due to extraneous matters
  3. 3 Whether the Court acted in excess of jurisdiction by condemning the advocate without notice

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the applicant was condemned to pay costs for alleged negligence without being given an opportunity to be heard, in violation of the constitutional right to a fair hearing. The punitive order was therefore a nullity and had to be set aside. Inconsequential defects in the affidavit did not warrant striking out the application as substantive grounds were clear from the notice of motion and affidavit.

Court Disposition

Application for review granted in part; punitive costs order against applicant set aside; each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • Deletion of the finding of negligence and costs order against Chadha and Company Advocates from the decision of 7th May, 2013.
  • Each party to bear its own costs in both the review and the original application.