19940318 TZHC Dar es Salaam
The court overruled the preliminary objection, holding that its jurisdiction to grant certiorari and mandamus is not ousted by the Security of Employment Act or the Employment Ordinance.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 19940318 TZHC Dar es Salaam
- Parties
- Applicant: DSM Airport Handling Company; Respondent: Christopher Mgolele; Respondents: Five Others; Respondent: 7th Respondent
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 18 March 1994
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Civil Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- Preliminary objection overruled; matter to proceed to hearing.
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of Court, Certiorari, Mandamus, Employment Termination, Reinstatement, Powers of Inferior Tribunals
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
DSM Airport Handling Company
Applicant
Christopher Mgolele
Respondent
Five Others
Respondents
7th Respondent
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the application for certiorari and mandamus in employment matters
- 2 Whether the Security of Employment Act and Employment Ordinance oust the court's jurisdiction
Ratio Decidendi
The court overruled the preliminary objection, holding that its jurisdiction to grant certiorari and mandamus is not ousted by the Security of Employment Act or the Employment Ordinance.
Court Disposition
Preliminary objection overruled; matter to proceed to hearing.
Orders
- Matter to be mentioned on 13/4/94 for fixing hearing date.
- Mr. Maira to be notified.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
.. AT DA]l ES SALAAM MISC. CIVIL CtSE NO. 62 OF 1992 In the Matter of DSM_Airp~rt Handling Cowp mt •.•.•••••.••• .AJ?PLICANT Versus ,qt °CJffiISTOPHER : 1GOLELE and Five (5) OtL~rs ........•.•. REsPON.l)EN? MAP IG.AllTO,t J • :: ,. - 4 R.ul1,r n G • ' ~ . , - •,J,. .-• ~ I. •• • If;,. • I »' • . .., ' •41►• ; 'w • _ F;ro,», the affidavits filed hy the }larties in this matter the following appear to be common grounds. The Tespindents were empJ.-O_Jees 01' the applicant companJ. ~n ianuar_y,, ~89 the/ were brought to the Dist-riot CouF-t at Kivukont • , ' ' ., . • -- • .• . -- i, charged with criminal offences, vide criminal ~se No,96/89. A' ~uple of days la·t~r th-e-·app.iic;nt dis.missed them .fr~m. the. em~ment.. Bµt at the cg.p.clusi~n ol' the trial, fl 24/7/~l all:of t~em w?re acquitted. apd when the/ sought ti. l.)e reins~.t.ed -in the emploiment·, · the· applicant Pefased tQ dQ s~, The respondents wer;e aggrieved and they }J.r~ught their Q.Q,mplaint. ~!o:re the R4ioonciliation BoaN.t On 24/a2/91 the B~rd <Vd~~ ·thel_:t'"' ~i,u~:t;?·:t~~~ri~ .•. Dissat;~t-~ed wi the tn d~~isi4n "the ~pplie2nt made .a reference ·to the Miniat,r for . _~~- WhQ dismis~d i1°11 Otl 27/5/92 and couiirll¥=d~: the .defisian ,11- t_he -·~rd• tSi~ng _no reason ~t a~l. !or t~is ~Qt5i-on, . ~ t,bis e_pp.l;loat:icnn th€ apillioan'i. is ~eking .:lrde:rs Ai ce:t~.r~ an.d lllalldar~u~ ~ ..i~1t~r _ali~ on }h~ g~,d that , e J3~f_d aid 1)()it. .ha¥ j,uris.ii.ot:Lan ~ .e.nt.Q_rt..ain the ~ Tetex:~~-! · · .,, . M Mr..- Mu~eruge who appeared tor tb-e r~sp,Qndente, has :r·aj,aed ·a: pr~l.iminary object_io1J. that this ct4rt has n• - Jurtsdic~ --tQ.;..-a11t.er:t.'1in ~ ~pli.oat~ .and ~.a qjtfd ;. ~\ton 48-'t' t.he securtt.Y 4:f Eml}l.CJrn~\. ~..a.n.d .&e<Jt~n ~--- . · ~ \ . . . . " - 2 - 130 of the Bmployment Ordinance·in support. I have to overrule the objection. I think it is now settled that the Securi t .. of EmploJment Act and the Employment Ordinance do not take a~iJ ttis Court's power .to make orders 1or c~rtiorari arct mandamus to prev~nt the inferior tribunals, or officials, from exc;.:;eding the limits of .i:h~tr legitimate_ sphere of· ac. tiion or to compel them to exercise their functions in acccrdance with the law. I will thus, proceed to hear the a;. )lication. \.__ D.P. MAPIOANO JUDGE Delivered Mr. Maira absent, notified. Mr. Malaba/Murugaruga for ls.t t<J 6th ·Respondents. Mr. Malaba for 7th Respondent. 1x~1r1-i D.P. MAPIGAHO 4w· JU:DGE 18/3/94 ORDER: Matter is to be mentioned on 13/~1)4 for purpose of fixing hearing date. Mr. Maira is to be notified. -A. ·- 't· .·'\. . . °'J'-' -'."/ ct.A.~ . D,P. MAPIGAHO JUDGE 18/3/94