20060331 TZHC Dar es Salaam

20060331 TZHC Dar es Salaam

The 1st Respondent could not be held liable for breaches of the lease agreement as he was not a party to it and had no contractual relationship with the 1st Appellant; the Regional Housing Tribunal's proceedings and judgment were vitiated due to improper constitution of the tribunal, justifying the Housing Appeals Tribunal's decision to quash and set aside those proceedings; a trial de novo cannot be ordered as the relevant tribunals no longer exist.

Citation
20060331 TZHC Dar es Salaam
Parties
1st Appellant / 2nd Respondent in Appeal No. 20 of 2003: G.P. Rutachubirwa; 2nd Appellant / 2nd Respondent in Appeal No. 16 of 2003: General Tyre (E.A.) Ltd.; 1st Respondent: Alfred Makundi
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
31 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (consolidated) / Judgment on Consolidated Appeals From Housing Appeals Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2003 dismissed with costs; Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2003 allowed with costs to the extent that a trial de novo should have been ordered, but is not possible due to repeal of the Rent Restriction Act.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Tribunals, Landlord Tenant Relationship, Employment Related Occupancy, Time Limitation for Appeals, Proper Constitution of Tribunal, Joinder of Parties
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Landlord and Tenant Employment Law Jurisdiction of Tribunals Landlord Tenant Relationship Employment Related Occupancy Time Limitation for Appeals Proper Constitution of Tribunal +1 more

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G.P. Rutachubirwa

1st Appellant / 2nd Respondent in Appeal No. 20 of 2003

General Tyre (E.A.) Ltd.

2nd Appellant / 2nd Respondent in Appeal No. 16 of 2003

Alfred Makundi

1st Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (consolidated) / Judgment on Consolidated Appeals From Housing Appeals Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Housing Appeals Tribunal erred in entertaining a time-barred appeal
  2. 2 Whether the 1st Respondent could be held jointly and severally liable with the 2nd Appellant for breaches of the lease
  3. 3 Whether the Housing Appeals Tribunal properly quashed and set aside the proceedings of the Regional Housing Tribunal for lack of jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The 1st Respondent could not be held liable for breaches of the lease agreement as he was not a party to it and had no contractual relationship with the 1st Appellant; the Regional Housing Tribunal's proceedings and judgment were vitiated due to improper constitution of the tribunal, justifying the Housing Appeals Tribunal's decision to quash and set aside those proceedings; a trial de novo cannot be ordered as the relevant tribunals no longer exist.

Court Disposition

Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2003 dismissed with costs; Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2003 allowed with costs to the extent that a trial de novo should have been ordered, but is not possible due to repeal of the Rent Restriction Act.

Orders

  • Civil Appeal No. 16 of 2003 dismissed with costs.
  • Civil Appeal No. 20 of 2003 allowed with costs to the extent that a trial de novo should have been ordered, but no such order is possible.