Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TZHC

fabian buberwa vs leonida daniel 2018 tzhc 2679 27 june 2018

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The application was incompetent due to wrong citation of the enabling provision, and the appeal lacks merit.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs

02

Material facts

Parties

Fabian Buberwa

Appellant

Leonida Daniel

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Appeal / Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The appellant challenged the District Court's dismissal of his application, arguing that the ruling was faulty due to the alleged wrong citation of the enabling provision.
Respondent
The respondent supported the District Court's decision, asserting that the cited provision did not exist and the application was incompetent.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Court of Appeal of Tanzania decisions

    Non-citation or wrong citation of the law renders an application incompetent.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The application was incompetent due to wrong citation of the enabling provision, and the appeal lacks merit.

Obiter and limits

  • The proper redress for an incompetent application is striking it out, not dismissal.
  • No order as to costs due to extenuating factors and the age of the parties.

Court disposition

appeal dismissed

  • No order as to costs

Source and reliance status

TZHC · 27 June 2018

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

TZHC

Judgment· 27 June 2018

fabian buberwa vs leonida daniel 2018 tzhc 2679 27 june 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA

AT BUKOBA PC. CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 7 OF 2017 (Arising from RM Criminal Application No. 14 of2016 and Criminal Application No. 46 of 2014 D/Court Bukoba from Criminal Case No. 38 of2014 Karabagaine Primary Court) FABIAN BUBERWA—---- —.................... APPELANT

VERSUS LEONIDA DANIEL....................... RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT 27/06/2018 BONGOLE, J. The appellant Fabian Buberwa is complaining before this court faulting the Ruling of the District Court in District Court of Bukoba Criminal Application No. 14 of 2016 where his application was dismissed for wrong citation of the enabling provision. I have a chance of glancing on the impugned ruling and the proceedings in District Court Criminal Application No. 14 of 2016 where I find that the said application was made under Section 321 (1) of the Magistrates Court Act (Cap. 11 RE: 202). The trial magistrate observed that such provisions of the law do not exist and proceeded in dismissing the application. It is obvious and trite that such provisions of the law cited by the appellant do not exist as correctly pointed by the trial magistrate. There are plotheral of decisions of the CAT that non citation or wrong citation of the law renders the application incompetent. The redress to an incompetent application is that of stricking it out insteady of dismissal. Wherefore that been observed, the application before the District Court was incompetent for wrong citation of the enabling provision of the law. This appeal is therefore with no merit and accordingly it is dismissed. No order as to costs taking into account the extinuating factors and the age of the parties. Accordingly ordered. 27/6/2018

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Court of Appeal of Tanzania decisions on citation of law

Case cited

Magistrates Court Act (Cap. 11 RE: 202)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.