junaco tanzania ltd another vs harel mallac tanzania ltd 2018 tzca 489 19 october 2018

The orders sought to be challenged were interlocutory as they did not finally dispose of the rights of the parties in the suit; therefore, any application for revision of such orders is barred by section 5(2)(d) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: junaco tanzania ltd another vs harel mallac tanzania ltd 2018 tzca 489 19 october 2018
Parties: Applicant: Junaco (T) Ltd; Applicant: Justin Lambert; Respondent: Harel Mallac Tanzania Limited
Court: TZCA
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 19 October 2018
Procedural Posture: Civil Revision Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome: application struck out with costs
Legal Topics: Revision, Interlocutory Orders, Veil of Incorporation, Execution of Decrees
Source Language: english

Civil Procedure Company Law Revision Interlocutory Orders Veil of Incorporation Execution of Decrees

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 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2

Parties

Junaco (T) Ltd

Applicant

Justin Lambert

Applicant

Harel Mallac Tanzania Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Revision Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

1 Whether the application for revision is incompetent for being predicated upon interlocutory orders
2 Whether the High Court's orders finally determined the suit or were interlocutory

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

application struck out with costs

Orders

Record remitted to the Commercial Division of the High Court to proceed with hearing of the two applications on their merits

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.