federicco gellin vs jaco roellence du plesis safari of south africa 2011 tzhccomd 2020 24 february 2011

federicco gellin vs jaco roellence du plesis safari of south africa 2011 tzhccomd 2020 24 february 2011

The court granted the extension of time because previous applications were struck out for technical defects rather than dismissed on merits, and the intended appeal raises serious legal issues, including alleged illegality in the interpretation of power of attorney. The court found sufficient cause for extension, emphasizing substantive justice over technicalities.

Citation
federicco gellin vs jaco roellence du plesis safari of south africa 2011 tzhccomd 2020 24 february 2011
Parties
Applicant/plaintiff: Federicco Gellini; 1st Respondent/defendant: Jaco Roellene Du Plessis Safari of South Africa; 2nd Respondent/defendant: Roellene Du Plessis alias Carolina Du Plessis; 3rd Respondent/defendant: Gert Jacobus Du Plessis (Seniour); 4th Respondent/defendant: Ryan Wienand; 5th Respondent/defendant: Abdulkadir Luta Mohamed; 6th Respondent/defendant: Christopher James Hatty; 7th Respondent/defendant: Masailand Hunting C. Ltd
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Lodge Fresh Notice of Intention to Appeal
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals, Power of Attorney, Locus Standi, Court Discretion
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appellate Practice Extension of Time Appeals Power of Attorney Locus Standi Court Discretion

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Federicco Gellini

Applicant/plaintiff

Jaco Roellene Du Plessis Safari of South Africa

1st Respondent/defendant

Roellene Du Plessis alias Carolina Du Plessis

2nd Respondent/defendant

Gert Jacobus Du Plessis (Seniour)

3rd Respondent/defendant

Ryan Wienand

4th Respondent/defendant

Abdulkadir Luta Mohamed

5th Respondent/defendant

Christopher James Hatty

6th Respondent/defendant

Masailand Hunting C. Ltd

7th Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Lodge Fresh Notice of Intention to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to extension of time to lodge a fresh notice of intention to appeal after previous applications were struck out for technical reasons
  2. 2 Whether repeated technical errors bar the applicant from seeking extension of time
  3. 3 Whether there is sufficient cause for extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The court granted the extension of time because previous applications were struck out for technical defects rather than dismissed on merits, and the intended appeal raises serious legal issues, including alleged illegality in the interpretation of power of attorney. The court found sufficient cause for extension, emphasizing substantive justice over technicalities.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • Extension of time to lodge a fresh notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal granted.
  • Application to be filed within 14 days from the date of the ruling.