khalid hussein muccadam vs ngulo mtiga others 2023 tzhc 17713 5 may 2023

khalid hussein muccadam vs ngulo mtiga others 2023 tzhc 17713 5 may 2023

Applicant failed to provide sufficient reasons for delay; neither alleged illegality nor technical delay justified extension of time as per established legal principles; delay was inordinate and applicant failed to account for each day.

Citation
khalid hussein muccadam vs ngulo mtiga others 2023 tzhc 17713 5 may 2023
Parties
Applicant: Khalid Hussein Muccadam; 1st Respondent: Ngulo Mtiga (As legal Representative of the Estate of the Late Abubakar Omar Said Mtiga); 2nd Respondent: Tulibako Tabu Kyoma (As Legal Representative of the Estate of the Late John Raymond Kyoma); 3rd Respondent: The Attorney General; 4th Respondent: The Minister for Constitution and Legal Affairs
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
5 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Judicial Review, Limitation Period, Illegality, Technical Delay
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Extension of Time Judicial Review Limitation Period Illegality Technical Delay

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khalid Hussein Muccadam

Applicant

Ngulo Mtiga (As legal Representative of the Estate of the Late Abubakar Omar Said Mtiga)

1st Respondent

Tulibako Tabu Kyoma (As Legal Representative of the Estate of the Late John Raymond Kyoma)

2nd Respondent

The Attorney General

3rd Respondent

The Minister for Constitution and Legal Affairs

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient reasons exist to grant extension of time to file application for leave for judicial review
  2. 2 Whether illegality or technical delay justify extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant failed to provide sufficient reasons for delay; neither alleged illegality nor technical delay justified extension of time as per established legal principles; delay was inordinate and applicant failed to account for each day.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Applicant to pay costs