joseph pius moshi jose vs republic 2015 tzca 63 15 july 2015

The applicant failed to state any irregularities in the decision he intended to address in the review, thus falling short of the requirements for extension of time to file for review.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: joseph pius moshi jose vs republic 2015 tzca 63 15 july 2015
Parties: Applicant: Joseph Pius Mushi @ Jose; Respondent: The Republic
Court: TZCA
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 15 July 2015
Procedural Posture: Criminal Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Review
Outcome: Application dismissed
Legal Topics: Extension of Time, Review of Judgment, Procedural Requirements
Source Language: english

Criminal Law Appellate Procedure Extension of Time Review of Judgment Procedural Requirements

Source-derived case record

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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Joseph Pius Mushi @ Jose

Applicant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application / Application for Extension of Time to File Review

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause for extension of time to file an application for review
2 Whether the applicant has indicated the irregularities intended to be addressed in the review

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to state any irregularities in the decision he intended to address in the review, thus falling short of the requirements for extension of time to file for review.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

Application for extension of time to file review is dismissed

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.