johan harald christer abrahsson vs exim bank tanzania ltd 2018 tzca 588 10 september 2018

johan harald christer abrahsson vs exim bank tanzania ltd 2018 tzca 588 10 september 2018

The applicant acted promptly after the previous application was struck out on a technicality and raised a claim of illegality; these constitute sufficient grounds for extension of time.

Citation
johan harald christer abrahsson vs exim bank tanzania ltd 2018 tzca 588 10 september 2018
Parties
Applicant: Johan Harald Christer Abrahsson; 1st Respondent: Exim Bank (T) Limited; 2nd Respondent: Dascar Limited; 3rd Respondent: MAS & Associates Company Limited; 4th Respondent: Yusuph Shaban Matimbwa
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
10 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Revision
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Revision, Execution Proceedings, Illegality, Fraud
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Revision Execution Proceedings Illegality Fraud

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johan Harald Christer Abrahsson

Applicant

Exim Bank (T) Limited

1st Respondent

Dascar Limited

2nd Respondent

MAS & Associates Company Limited

3rd Respondent

Yusuph Shaban Matimbwa

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Revision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient grounds exist for extension of time to file revision against execution proceedings and sale of applicant's property

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant acted promptly after the previous application was struck out on a technicality and raised a claim of illegality; these constitute sufficient grounds for extension of time.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • Leave granted to institute revision proceedings within twenty one days from the date of delivery of this ruling.
  • No order as to costs.