general manager african barrick gold mine ltd vs chacha kiguha others 2017 tzca 211 12 december 2017

general manager african barrick gold mine ltd vs chacha kiguha others 2017 tzca 211 12 december 2017

The appeal is incompetent because the record of appeal did not contain the actual exhibits admitted in evidence, as required by Rule 96(1)(f) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009. The inclusion of annextures marked as exhibits does not satisfy the requirement. The omission is fatal and renders the appeal liable to be struck out.

Citation
general manager african barrick gold mine ltd vs chacha kiguha others 2017 tzca 211 12 december 2017
Parties
Appellant: General Manager African Barrick Gold Mine Ltd.; 1st Respondent: Chacha Kiguha; 2nd Respondent: Neema Chacha; 3rd Respondent: Bhoke Chacha (a minor by his next friend Chacha Kiguha); 4th Respondent: Kiguha Chacha (a minor by his next friend Chacha Kiguha); 5th Respondent: Motongori Chacha (a minor by his next friend Neema Chacha); 6th Respondent: Surati Chacha (a minor by his next friend Neema Chacha)
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
12 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
appeal struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Appeal Competence, Record of Appeal, Documentary Evidence, Pleadings
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appeal Competence Record of Appeal Documentary Evidence Pleadings

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

General Manager African Barrick Gold Mine Ltd.

Appellant

Chacha Kiguha

1st Respondent

Neema Chacha

2nd Respondent

Bhoke Chacha (a minor by his next friend Chacha Kiguha)

3rd Respondent

Kiguha Chacha (a minor by his next friend Chacha Kiguha)

4th Respondent

Motongori Chacha (a minor by his next friend Neema Chacha)

5th Respondent

Surati Chacha (a minor by his next friend Neema Chacha)

6th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the omission of exhibits and original pleadings from the record of appeal renders the appeal incompetent under Rule 96(1)(c) and (f) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is incompetent because the record of appeal did not contain the actual exhibits admitted in evidence, as required by Rule 96(1)(f) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009. The inclusion of annextures marked as exhibits does not satisfy the requirement. The omission is fatal and renders the appeal liable to be struck out.

Court Disposition

appeal struck out with costs

Orders

  • The appeal is struck out with costs.