19921210 TZHC Dar es Salaam 1

THE UNITED ~:tc OF TJiNZliNIA IN TilE IIIGil CO'URT OF TLu~ZlUn:ll. CIVIL C!.sE mmmma 305 OF_.1991 II.tlilIDTA O?lil.RI LWIDW • • • • • o • • • • o • • o • • • • 0 • • FLAINTIFF ~SUS SOCIE11E nwrwmu·mmrn DE TELECOMUUNICLTI01~S l.RZONtfflQOES • :om:FEtmt~lT· fl U L I n GJ, ,,.. ....., . In this ].lt"eliminary point, J.t:-. Kisusi, learned. counse~ t01: tho. defonda.nt J;>aised tb.G question of limitntion, Ho submitted thet the ·suti filed. by the ;pla.iniiff was tirae-bEJ.L,--od since it woo :filed more than I yoe.rs fitoo the a.e,tt, whon tho co;uso of action accrued. lio ;referred to the !Aw of Limito..tion Act Part 1 first schodulc item·7 1 Ile ~guod' __ _ ·..-' t\u'thoI' that according to paragrD,ph 3 of tho plaint 'tho cause O: ·tte;ion a,oorued on 30/11/04 when the sorviccs of tho pl~intitf ~,o.r.o termimtoa· ,.but thct tho puit was not filed until 3/10/91, ~ si; yo~ from i 1 . I 30/11/~4• )Io wont on to nrguc tl.1'"..t the Civil !Toco~ Code ~cqvJ,ros ~o plo.intiff to show in tho plcint tho reasons cxemptinG hiLl froLl '.·,1.. i tho ~ of l:l.oitation, ethcrwiao tho 1>lointiff should show that the suit. is. not b~od by lioi ta.tion. Re sr,id that thoJ?O 1ms no such nvorrora.opt. in the plo.int • IIo m-gucd furtho~ tho,t the ro:ply shoulc1 not be tclron ··1 into oons.i.do:;)c.tion with :L"ogcrd to tho issue of 1imitet;on• I Mr. Kisusi roforrod to the :i,,oply to tho written sta.tor.1cnt of dofcnoo and, stated tb...."..t tho plo.int a·,..kcs no nention of ~mn,t 1ros boinc i■ I pl'oscoutod in tho t r ~ l which is not a. court in ci.1131~ oc,sc, Ho ~cyQd for: tho dismissal of tho suit o.<idil'JG that tho jud{;mont in tho tl'ibunnl h.a.d as po~ios J'lf;JATA c.ncl. the dofontk--mt a.nd not tho pla.intiff and tho dafo.ncl"'1.l1t. I11 ~oplsr,-, ?ih'. Mi~.1c;cu'U(§;l,, Senior k"bour Officcc foz- tho :plaintiff wcru,od tbAt tho suit wcs not tine l::;.m--::i:-od ~Y virtue of section 21 o:f tho Lnw of Lioitntj.on Act cs tho :pln.inti:ff wc,s pursuinc his ca.so in tho InduetricJ. 00\.ll't of To.nscmio.. Ile scid that tho wo:rd t:-dlmml in tho p ~ ~~ 'J!r~ 1..ot ~ ~ ro-l.J:OS!X)oti~. t~ ~ ~ ; I I ', ,· . ,. ., - ··-.,... -- .... "', ,,. / ·,., - 2 - ~ fo:r bcok ns. 1967., . Ile l'c;forrod. to Aot No, :; of 1990. He a r ~ further tho,t tho p~if:f' filod his CQPQ in the In~-f;j_~ C ~ ~ tho. Lol,)ow: Comissioncr in \111.i.oh ~ - ~j..o(5' w~ J1>1Ui.TA on bohn'-f of' tho plcl.ntiff and tho dofcnc1."..nt, Ho so,id furtho~ tl1.C,t tho prooont civil oo.,so 110.s b1'ouc;1J.t to court '\lllO.at the Eoployoont Ordin..1.noo tl..f'b.or -tho docision, o..nd thnt such ccsos ht>.d to be ho2..rd tmd dotor□inod aooQ, ding to f!'l..ilisto.nticl justice. Ho conoludod tb,..,'"!.t the roJ?lY . should be . ~ ~o. o.oocunt end thct tho objection shou.ld 'bo dismiasod. Mr. l'iS1uai., :oo.i.~t\to(l..w his ~pl~ Thei,°" ho ho.cl sc..id in his nn.i,n ,. cd.dr.oss•. \ :t ~Go with Mr. Kisusi tho,t tho plcint, ooco~ding to Ordor VII lt,,2lo 6, ·r.t\,\St show, whore tho su.it is :l.nstitu1i.od c-.ftozo tho cxpirction of tho period prosoribod by tho lrnr of limito,tion, tho ·Q:ound upon ~l'llioJi c~ption from such lo.w is olcinod. This provisio11. is ~ncmtory and if'. tlO a;roi..md upon which oxooption :t'rora tho lo,u of litlita.tion is olaµiod is eh.own, 'bhon tho plnint onnnot bo r.doittod as it will c1omily bo tino b~d. Tho lo,w docs not no.kc· o.ny ~option of this rule 1moroby c. plDJ.mi:ef my show tho grounds, of oxomption in tho !'OJ?lY• I ~oo with r,t: • .Kisusi tlmt tho plnint nu.st 1:,e recd o.lono nnd not in conjunoUon with a :i:oply to the wri tton sta.touont of dtl:f'onco booc.usc the do.foot of o. plnint. QLmnot bo C'1.,U'Od by c, reply to the m-itton atc,tor10nt of dotonoo, \ Rulo ~ of Cl:r:'dOl' VII rec.els c.s followsa Whor~ tho suit is insti-tu-tiod o.fter tho ~i,rn.tion of tho period proscribed by tho lo..w of lir.rl.t4tion, tho plc.int slmll show tlio ground upon which exemption fi'oo such l~w is clo.ii:10d ( OOJ.?MSis supplied}, 'llho nbovc :pa.ssc.go ccn be intoi"Pl'otod to nonn tho.t whoro tho :plQ.im . doos riot shovr ( liko in thi.s cnoo) the e;-round upon Whieh o:ironption :f:t'oo 1bo. ,-Cu of liol.tction, no ~option·oc.n bo QJ.nitlod 1 ln this en.so n. ~ o n is clo.inod in tho plo..int and yet tho sv.it wns filed nftor ~ .·.: ~~s sinco tho oo.uso of action D.1-,osa, i I D,groo wi tp, Mr. Kisusi tl.1!1:t tho co.use of v.otion, nxoso fro□ the dnta of ·d.isoissru. on 30/1.1/84. • Tho suit 1rcs filod. o'n~\'s 6. yov..rs 10 oanths and 2 ~dnys ~o□ 30/11/04, · 'l'll.a suit is be.sod on c contrcct of onployocnt o:ncl tho po:ciiod of lir.tttc:tio11 for such o. suit is 6 yoc..rs o.s cc.n 1Jo soon in tho Lc.v~, of Lioitction AQ;, Po:-t 11- ~ Sch.oau:I.o, itoo .7• ~ au;j.t .is.- olc,.~ t.irJb.~. ~ .....;- -;: -;.. . • oo'~ o,,./"J. .... 11 I - 3 A suit bo.scd on tho E::lployocTit -""rdirc.neo is no c.xcO})tion to tho Law t'l Lioitction .Li.cit sinoo tho Act cloos nd o.a.ko oxooption of any stc..tuto, ,.,., Section 3 o:f tho La.w of Linito.tion Act sto.t?s Q,S followsr Dubjoct to tho previsions of this Act, CJVC1:cy J;)roooodi?lg' dosoribo.d in the ..:-irst oolutU'1 of tho First Sohodulo to this .Act and which is insti tutod aft.or -tho period of Linitctitn J;tt'csoribod thoroforo opposito thoroto in tho ·so~onq. coluon, shell bo disnissod whotho1, or not linitation b.a.s been sot Up o.s o. dofonco, It is oloar :fron eoction 3 cbovo tho.t this suit r..JUSt bo d.isaiss;4 since it iS tioo bDXTcd end I so disoiss it .with oosts. This would bo onoucb. to dispose of this mtt.oi-. Dut I will dQe.l with tho second leg oi' tho m- 0W:1ont of Mr. Kisusi a.s well. Tho sooond linb ef tho n.l'@ll'.lOnt is tho.t oven- if tho reply wc1·0 to bo taken intt, o.ooount :i.11 clotoroining 1rhothor tho suit is tioo borrod or not, still ~ period &.ti:'ine ~al-. tho plaintiff has boon l)l'osoouting tho na.ttor bof~ tho Pornc.nont Lc.baur Tribunal cannot be oxoludod in OOIJJ.mting tho l)Qritd ~f llitltction :proscribed for su.oh a suit bocctlSO a ~iburol is not a c~, Mr. Mruga~e,t s o.rgw.1cnt was tlmt tho Porr.10.ncnt LOOO'li.1' Tribuml is c.nd hes been sinoo 1967 by virtue of .Act no. 3 of 19$0 the Industrial c,1.wt of To..nzo.i'lie and thcrcf •:;r(I o.. COUJ."--t within tho r.10Cl.!U.11G of "courtt.11 iS socti011. 21 ( 1) of tho Law of Lioitation Act., I do not agroo with tho into11.)rot::-..tion of Act Hoo 3 of 199c,. I on of tho view that before tho D.r.1011.dnont brought about by Acii no. 3 of ~990 there wc.s tho Pormnont: Lo.bour Tribuno.1. mid. tbnt tho In&.wtrw Court of ~nzonin 0..1.IJO into offcot when Aot Hoo 3 of 1990 cr..r.10 into offoot end not othorwiso. Rctros:poctivo o,pplion.tion of a Stctuto would only o.p:ply whCU'o the ste'tut.t itself sn.ys sde Act lTco 3 of 1990 docs not sey tlmt tho Act hes rotre9> ootivo cffoot. Secondly scotion 21 of ·tho Lo.w of Liuito..tion Act docs ne-b / a,pply hero for the siiir_plo roe.son thc;t there woro no oivil :pr<>cOOoi:ngs in o.tJ;>" c0'-1rl4 Tho ,rnr~ ... ~ . ::ur'· ., .,.,. -1.sod _in soction 21 ~"mnot bo into:L~to4 to include the Pornnnont Labour 'ITibumlc- Indeed tho word fl:pro~ooding 1' nlso O.pj_)Oc.:..•ine in section 21 procodbd by the word civ.:i.l, is dofinod in section 2 of tho Ad to nci:m a. suit, o.n o.ppon.l Cf'~ o.n n.ppliMti.on inal\1.d.iUG proccodine;'S under tho custorn:i.ry lcw, Thero is no ind.iootion tlmt :procoodings in 1>"' - -~17.~,,,mt Lc.boux Tribmml a.re a.1.so includod. '!lhorotc:ro I hold tb.o,t section 21 of t . . . ,., ~.r-+ l'lf'.'os not o.wly. . •••o•./4. ---- ., .., , J ,f •' - 4 - Tho suit ,I is tha:ro:CfN--~o.d ~rit4 oosts f~ bc.inG tioe bt1.1.'re4t .I . ( <r-···-· _____________··:) f / I I I I - JIJIXJE 1oj12/1592 ' . i Mr. Kisu.si f~ tho dofondo.nt· • Mr. Mrug~ far tho plaintiff. . . MP~_~¥$• I.' I I I o.pply for loavo to o.1mool to Court of AppolJl ot . ~•t Ordo:r, Appllio\l.tion [. to be mdo f <ll'OOlly• l 1 r r I c;._· -~ 1 .t A. • ~ JUlXlE I J 10/12/1992 j ( i l I l I I l I I I I ' .,