chalamanda kauteme vs republic 2013 tzca 249 5 august 2013

chalamanda kauteme vs republic 2013 tzca 249 5 august 2013

The ground raised by the applicant does not fall within the five grounds for review under Rule 66(1); reconsidering the issue of identification would amount to sitting on appeal against the Court's own judgment, which is not permitted as the Court is functus officio.

Citation
chalamanda kauteme vs republic 2013 tzca 249 5 august 2013
Parties
Applicant: Chalamanda Kauteme; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
5 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review Application / Ruling on Application for Review of Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Review of Appellate Judgment, Grounds for Review, Identification Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Appellate Procedure Review of Appellate Judgment Grounds for Review Identification Evidence

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chalamanda Kauteme

Applicant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for review falls within the permissible grounds under Rule 66(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009
  2. 2 Whether the issue of identification was properly considered in the original judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The ground raised by the applicant does not fall within the five grounds for review under Rule 66(1); reconsidering the issue of identification would amount to sitting on appeal against the Court's own judgment, which is not permitted as the Court is functus officio.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for review is dismissed