gladness ramadhani mziray vs mipeko village council and 8 others 2020 tzhclandd 3853 6 november 2020

gladness ramadhani mziray vs mipeko village council and 8 others 2020 tzhclandd 3853 6 november 2020

The plaintiff did not issue a valid 30 days statutory notice to the 1st defendant as required by law; the letter relied upon did not state the cause of action and was not properly addressed. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction and the suit is struck out.

Citation
gladness ramadhani mziray vs mipeko village council and 8 others 2020 tzhclandd 3853 6 november 2020
Parties
Plaintiff: Gladness Ramadhani Mziray; 1st Defendant: Mipeko Village Council; 2nd Defendant: Tatu Mohamed Salehe; 3rd Defendant: Said Omary Muketo; 4th Defendant: Asha Mohamed Liwake; 5th Defendant: Maulidy Rashid Michenje; 6th Defendant: Bakari Rashid Michenje; 7th Defendant: Hassan Rai Katundu; 8th Defendant: Salehe Omary Kungi; 9th Defendant: Rashid Mohamed Mboga
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
6 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Suit struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Statutory Notice Requirement, Jurisdiction, Suing Local Government Authorities
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Statutory Notice Requirement Jurisdiction Suing Local Government Authorities

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

Gladness Ramadhani Mziray

Plaintiff

Mipeko Village Council

1st Defendant

Tatu Mohamed Salehe

2nd Defendant

Said Omary Muketo

3rd Defendant

Asha Mohamed Liwake

4th Defendant

Maulidy Rashid Michenje

5th Defendant

Bakari Rashid Michenje

6th Defendant

Hassan Rai Katundu

7th Defendant

Salehe Omary Kungi

8th Defendant

Rashid Mohamed Mboga

9th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff issued a valid 30 days statutory notice to the 1st defendant as required by law before instituting the suit
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction in absence of such notice

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff did not issue a valid 30 days statutory notice to the 1st defendant as required by law; the letter relied upon did not state the cause of action and was not properly addressed. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction and the suit is struck out.

Court Disposition

Suit struck out with costs

Orders

  • Land Case No. 340 of 2015 is struck out for lack of 30 days statutory notice to the 1st defendant
  • Plaintiff to pay costs