dr khamis kibola vs anthony goodluck shuma 2 others 2022 tzhc 14589 11 november 2022

dr khamis kibola vs anthony goodluck shuma 2 others 2022 tzhc 14589 11 november 2022

The applicant failed to account for all days of delay, and the alleged illegality was not apparent on the face of the record but required long argument. There was no sufficient cause for extension of time, and the grounds for leave to appeal were hypothetical and not arguable. Both applications lacked merit and were dismissed.

Citation
dr khamis kibola vs anthony goodluck shuma 2 others 2022 tzhc 14589 11 november 2022
Parties
Applicant: Dr. Hamis Saidi Kibola; 1st Respondent: Anthony Goodluck Shuma; 2nd Respondent: Hadija Tati; 3rd Respondent: The Advocates Committee
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
11 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Miscellaneous Civil Applications / Ruling on Applications for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Applications dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Locus Standi, Professional Misconduct, Limitation of Actions
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Legal Profession Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Locus Standi Professional Misconduct Limitation of Actions

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

Parties

Dr. Hamis Saidi Kibola

Applicant

Anthony Goodluck Shuma

1st Respondent

Hadija Tati

2nd Respondent

The Advocates Committee

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Consolidated Miscellaneous Civil Applications / Ruling on Applications for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient reasons exist to grant extension of time for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for all days of delay, and the alleged illegality was not apparent on the face of the record but required long argument. There was no sufficient cause for extension of time, and the grounds for leave to appeal were hypothetical and not arguable. Both applications lacked merit and were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Both applications for extension of time for leave to appeal and for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal are dismissed with costs.