joachim mwingira vs agatha mwingira another 2017 tzca 344 1 august 2017

joachim mwingira vs agatha mwingira another 2017 tzca 344 1 august 2017

The applicant failed to account for each day of delay and did not provide a definitive explanation for the delay in seeking extension of time. The applicant had alternative remedies, including appeal or seeking to set aside the dismissal in the High Court, and thus could not invoke the Court's revisional jurisdiction. No extraordinary circumstances justified granting the extension.

Citation
joachim mwingira vs agatha mwingira another 2017 tzca 344 1 august 2017
Parties
Applicant: Joachim Mwingira; First Respondent: Agatha Mwingira; Second Respondent: Judith Mwingira
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Revision
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Revision, Letters of Administration, Caveat Proceedings, Right of Appeal, Procedural Irregularities
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Probate and Administration Extension of Time Revision Letters of Administration Caveat Proceedings Right of Appeal Procedural Irregularities

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joachim Mwingira

Applicant

Agatha Mwingira

First Respondent

Judith Mwingira

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Revision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for extension of time to apply for revision of the High Court's decision
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had alternative remedies apart from revision
  3. 3 Whether the High Court's proceedings were tainted with illegalities or irregularities

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for each day of delay and did not provide a definitive explanation for the delay in seeking extension of time. The applicant had alternative remedies, including appeal or seeking to set aside the dismissal in the High Court, and thus could not invoke the Court's revisional jurisdiction. No extraordinary circumstances justified granting the extension.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Each party to bear its own costs