LABOUR COMMISSIONER V

LABOUR COMMISSIONER V

There are conflicting decisions of the High Court on whether filing CMA F10 is mandatory prior to filing a revision, creating legal uncertainty. This uncertainty justifies certification of a point of law for determination by the Court of Appeal.

Citation
LABOUR COMMISSIONER V
Parties
Applicant: Labour Commissioner; 1st Respondent: Francis Shenyangwa; 2nd Respondent: Mobisol UK Limited; 3rd Respondent: Letshengo Bank (T) Ltd; 4th Respondent: Salome E. Mwakigomba
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Labour Application / Ruling on Application for Certification of Point of Law for Appeal
Outcome
Application allowed; point of law certified for appeal.
Legal Topics
Certification of Point of Law, Conflicting Decisions, Notice of Intention to Seek Revision (cma F10), Revision Procedure
Source Language
English

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 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Labour Commissioner

Applicant

Francis Shenyangwa

1st Respondent

Mobisol UK Limited

2nd Respondent

Letshengo Bank (T) Ltd

3rd Respondent

Salome E. Mwakigomba

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Labour Application / Ruling on Application for Certification of Point of Law for Appeal

  1. 1 Whether it is mandatory to file Notice of Intention to Seek Revision (CMA F10) at the Commission for Mediation and Arbitration prior to filing a revision before the Labour Court

Ratio Decidendi

There are conflicting decisions of the High Court on whether filing CMA F10 is mandatory prior to filing a revision, creating legal uncertainty. This uncertainty justifies certification of a point of law for determination by the Court of Appeal.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; point of law certified for appeal.

Orders

  • Certification granted that there is a point of law worth consideration by the Court of Appeal.