kashekya vs attorney general 2016 tzca 116 8 april 2016

kashekya vs attorney general 2016 tzca 116 8 april 2016

Appellant did not comply with section 48(1)(e) of the Mining Act, 1979 by failing to obtain written consent from CDA before prospecting; Commissioner was justified in refusing registration of the claim.

Citation
kashekya vs attorney general 2016 tzca 116 8 april 2016
Parties
Appellant: John Kashekya; Respondent: Attorney General
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
8 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Prospecting Rights, Registration of Mining Claims, Surface Rights Consent
Source Language
English
Mining Law Administrative Law Prospecting Rights Registration of Mining Claims Surface Rights Consent

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Kashekya

Appellant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the appellant comply with all legal requirements to acquire and register a mining claim?
  2. 2 Was the Commissioner justified in refusing to register the appellant's claim?
  3. 3 Did the appellant suffer damages due to refusal to register the claim?

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant did not comply with section 48(1)(e) of the Mining Act, 1979 by failing to obtain written consent from CDA before prospecting; Commissioner was justified in refusing registration of the claim.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order for costs