daniel malambo and another vs pangea minerals ltd 2020 tzhc 720 24 april 2020

daniel malambo and another vs pangea minerals ltd 2020 tzhc 720 24 april 2020

Applicants failed to account for the delay of over four years, did not show diligence, and the alleged illegality was unfounded as the prior decision was based on lack of merit. Negligence or actions of their representative do not justify extension. No sufficient cause was established for granting extension of time.

Citation
daniel malambo and another vs pangea minerals ltd 2020 tzhc 720 24 april 2020
Parties
Applicant: Daniel Malambo; Applicant: Joseph Kapela; Respondent: Pangea Minerals Limited
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Labour Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Delay and Diligence, Illegality as Ground for Extension
Source Language
English
Labour Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Procedure Delay and Diligence Illegality as Ground for Extension

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

Daniel Malambo

Applicant

Joseph Kapela

Applicant

Pangea Minerals Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Labour Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have shown sufficient cause for extension of time to file notice of appeal
  2. 2 Whether the delay was inordinate and properly accounted for
  3. 3 Whether alleged illegality in the previous decision constitutes sufficient reason for extension

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants failed to account for the delay of over four years, did not show diligence, and the alleged illegality was unfounded as the prior decision was based on lack of merit. Negligence or actions of their representative do not justify extension. No sufficient cause was established for granting extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs