crdb bank plc another vs hamida seif ahmad another 2023 tzhc 23031 24 november 2023

crdb bank plc another vs hamida seif ahmad another 2023 tzhc 23031 24 november 2023

The applicants' delay was not technical but due to negligence in filing at the wrong registry, and the application was never admitted in court. Excessive taxation of costs is not an illegality apparent on the face of the record. The application does not raise issues of general importance or novel points of law warranting leave to appeal.

Citation
crdb bank plc another vs hamida seif ahmad another 2023 tzhc 23031 24 november 2023
Parties
Applicant: CRDB Bank PLC; Applicant: Eagle Auction Mart; Respondent: Hamida Seif Ahmad; Respondent: Fidelis Petro Swai
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Taxation of Costs, Technical Delay, Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Taxation of Costs Technical Delay Jurisdiction

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CRDB Bank PLC

Applicant

Eagle Auction Mart

Applicant

Hamida Seif Ahmad

Respondent

Fidelis Petro Swai

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the application for extension of time to file reference due to filing in the wrong registry
  2. 2 Whether an excessive award by the taxing master amounts to an irregularity or illegality justifying extension of time
  3. 3 Whether the application raises triable issues warranting leave to appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants' delay was not technical but due to negligence in filing at the wrong registry, and the application was never admitted in court. Excessive taxation of costs is not an illegality apparent on the face of the record. The application does not raise issues of general importance or novel points of law warranting leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs