edward epimack lasway vs noctunal international ltd others 2019 tzhc 15 22 october 2019

edward epimack lasway vs noctunal international ltd others 2019 tzhc 15 22 october 2019

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant leave to re-file a civil case out of time after withdrawal with leave to refile; extension of time must be sought from the Minister responsible under the Law of Limitation Act.

Citation
edward epimack lasway vs noctunal international ltd others 2019 tzhc 15 22 october 2019
Parties
Applicant: Edward Epimack Lasway; 1st Respondent: Noctunal International Limited; 2nd Respondent: Stanbic Bank Tanzania Limited
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
22 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Misc Civil Application / Ruling
Outcome
Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Jurisdiction, Withdrawal and Refiling of Suit
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Extension of Time Jurisdiction Withdrawal and Refiling of Suit

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Epimack Lasway

Applicant

Noctunal International Limited

1st Respondent

Stanbic Bank Tanzania Limited

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Misc Civil Application / Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to grant leave to re-file a civil case out of time after withdrawal with leave to refile
  2. 2 Whether the applicant should seek extension of time from the Minister responsible under the Law of Limitation Act

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant leave to re-file a civil case out of time after withdrawal with leave to refile; extension of time must be sought from the Minister responsible under the Law of Limitation Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
  • No order as to costs.