lightnes francis vs godson william makange administrator of the estate of the late others 2022 tzhc 15475 8 december 2022

lightnes francis vs godson william makange administrator of the estate of the late others 2022 tzhc 15475 8 december 2022

The applicant failed to provide sufficient reasons for the delay, and the alleged illegality was not properly raised in the affidavit but only in submissions, which the court cannot act upon. Therefore, the application for extension of time is dismissed.

Citation
lightnes francis vs godson william makange administrator of the estate of the late others 2022 tzhc 15475 8 december 2022
Parties
Applicant: Lightness Francis; 1st Respondent: Godson William Makange (Administrator of the estate of the late Willy Stanley Makange); 2nd Respondent: CRDB (1996) Ltd Lumumba Branch; 3rd Respondent: Oldonyo Lengai Auction Mart
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
8 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals, Illegality as Ground for Extension, Affidavit Evidence
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals Illegality as Ground for Extension Affidavit Evidence

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lightness Francis

Applicant

Godson William Makange (Administrator of the estate of the late Willy Stanley Makange)

1st Respondent

CRDB (1996) Ltd Lumumba Branch

2nd Respondent

Oldonyo Lengai Auction Mart

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient reason for extension of time to file notice of appeal out of time
  2. 2 Whether alleged illegality constitutes sufficient ground for extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide sufficient reasons for the delay, and the alleged illegality was not properly raised in the affidavit but only in submissions, which the court cannot act upon. Therefore, the application for extension of time is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for extension of time is dismissed with costs