kitinda kimaro vs anthony ngoo another 2014 tzca 173 3 november 2014
Section 4(3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act does not apply where the High Court is no longer seized of the proceedings; therefore, the Court of Appeal is not properly moved to exercise revisional jurisdiction in this case.
- Citation
- kitinda kimaro vs anthony ngoo another 2014 tzca 173 3 november 2014
- Parties
- Applicant: Kitinda Kimaro; 1st Respondent: Anthony Ngoo; 2nd Respondent: Davis Anthony Ngoo
- Court
- TZCA
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 3 November 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application for Revision / Ruling on Preliminary Legal Point
- Outcome
- Application struck out as misconceived and incompetent
- Legal Topics
- Revisional Jurisdiction, Appellate Jurisdiction, High Court Proceedings, Jurisdictional Competence
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kitinda Kimaro
Applicant
Anthony Ngoo
1st Respondent
Davis Anthony Ngoo
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application for Revision / Ruling on Preliminary Legal Point
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court of Appeal can exercise revisional jurisdiction under section 4(3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act when the subject proceedings are no longer before the High Court
Ratio Decidendi
Section 4(3) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act does not apply where the High Court is no longer seized of the proceedings; therefore, the Court of Appeal is not properly moved to exercise revisional jurisdiction in this case.
Court Disposition
Application struck out as misconceived and incompetent
Orders
- Application struck out with no order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment