joe ocean clearing forwading co ltd vs r k trucking ltd another 2023 tzhccomd 236 5 july 2023

joe ocean clearing forwading co ltd vs r k trucking ltd another 2023 tzhccomd 236 5 july 2023

The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, as there was no supporting affidavit from the previous advocate to substantiate the claims of instruction and diligence. Negligence or ignorance of the law by the advocate does not constitute good cause. The alleged illegality was not properly pleaded in the affidavit and did not meet the threshold for granting extension of time.

Citation
joe ocean clearing forwading co ltd vs r k trucking ltd another 2023 tzhccomd 236 5 july 2023
Parties
Applicant: Joe Ocean Clearing & Forwarding Co. Limited; 1st Respondent: R&K Trucking Limited; 2nd Respondent: Sabihi Rashidi Nokolage
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
5 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Commercial Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs to the 1st Respondent.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Good Cause, Advocate Negligence, Illegality as Ground for Extension
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Appellate Practice Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Good Cause Advocate Negligence Illegality as Ground for Extension

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joe Ocean Clearing & Forwarding Co. Limited

Applicant

R&K Trucking Limited

1st Respondent

Sabihi Rashidi Nokolage

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Commercial Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to file Notice of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether advocate's negligence or ignorance constitutes good cause for extension of time
  3. 3 Whether alleged illegality was properly raised and sufficient to warrant extension

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, as there was no supporting affidavit from the previous advocate to substantiate the claims of instruction and diligence. Negligence or ignorance of the law by the advocate does not constitute good cause. The alleged illegality was not properly pleaded in the affidavit and did not meet the threshold for granting extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs to the 1st Respondent.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed for lack of merit.
  • Costs awarded to the 1st Respondent.