hashimu ally digello 7 4 others vs alphakrust ltd 2023 tzhcld 1303 2 june 2023

hashimu ally digello 7 4 others vs alphakrust ltd 2023 tzhcld 1303 2 june 2023

The applicants failed to prove that the respondent had finalized the decision to terminate their employment, as required by law, before filing the dispute at CMA. There was no evidence of a termination letter or testimony from the guard who allegedly informed them of their termination. Therefore, the application was filed prematurely and is without merit.

Citation
hashimu ally digello 7 4 others vs alphakrust ltd 2023 tzhcld 1303 2 june 2023
Parties
Applicant: Hashimu Ally Digello; Applicant: Mariam Juma; Applicant: Shani Juma Matandiko; Applicant: Helena Joseph Kambangwa; Applicant: Diana Gaudence Shayo; Respondent: Alphakrust Ltd
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
2 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Labour Revision / Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Termination, Retrenchment Procedures, Premature Filing, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Labour Law Unfair Termination Retrenchment Procedures Premature Filing Burden of Proof

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hashimu Ally Digello

Applicant

Mariam Juma

Applicant

Shani Juma Matandiko

Applicant

Helena Joseph Kambangwa

Applicant

Diana Gaudence Shayo

Applicant

Alphakrust Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Revision / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants filed their application at CMA prematurely
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were unfairly terminated without following proper procedure
  3. 3 What reliefs, if any, are the parties entitled to

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to prove that the respondent had finalized the decision to terminate their employment, as required by law, before filing the dispute at CMA. There was no evidence of a termination letter or testimony from the guard who allegedly informed them of their termination. Therefore, the application was filed prematurely and is without merit.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • No costs awarded to either party