lim han yung anoher vs lucy traseas kristensen 2023 tzhclandd 23 30 january 2023

lim han yung anoher vs lucy traseas kristensen 2023 tzhclandd 23 30 january 2023

The application is untenable in law because Order XXI Rule 27 CPC does not apply when the pending case is before the Court of Appeal, and the High Court lacks jurisdiction; filing similar applications in different courts amounts to forum shopping and abuse of process.

Citation
lim han yung anoher vs lucy traseas kristensen 2023 tzhclandd 23 30 january 2023
Parties
Applicant: Lim Han Yung; Applicant: Lim Trading Company Limited; Respondent: Lucytraseas Kristensen
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
30 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objections
Outcome
application struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Jurisdiction, Forum Shopping, Abuse of Process
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Stay of Execution Jurisdiction Forum Shopping Abuse of Process

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lim Han Yung

Applicant

Lim Trading Company Limited

Applicant

Lucytraseas Kristensen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objections

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for stay of execution is tenable under Order XXI Rule 27 of the Civil Procedure Code when the pending case is before the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the application constitutes forum shopping and abuse of court process

Ratio Decidendi

The application is untenable in law because Order XXI Rule 27 CPC does not apply when the pending case is before the Court of Appeal, and the High Court lacks jurisdiction; filing similar applications in different courts amounts to forum shopping and abuse of process.

Court Disposition

application struck out with costs

Orders

  • application struck out
  • costs awarded to respondent