ludovick michael masawe vs samson herman 2022 tzca 41 21 february 2022

ludovick michael masawe vs samson herman 2022 tzca 41 21 february 2022

The existence of an illegality in the High Court's refusal to grant leave for appeal, contrary to section 47(1) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, constitutes good cause for extension of time, warranting exercise of the Court's discretion to grant the application.

Citation
ludovick michael masawe vs samson herman 2022 tzca 41 21 february 2022
Parties
Applicant: Ludovick Michael Masawe; Respondent: Samson Herman
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
21 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application allowed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, Land Disputes Courts Act, Appeals Procedure
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Extension of Time Leave to Appeal Land Disputes Courts Act Appeals Procedure

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ludovick Michael Masawe

Applicant

Samson Herman

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown good cause for extension of time to file notice of appeal and leave to appeal
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the application for want of points of law under section 47(1) of the Land Disputes Courts Act

Ratio Decidendi

The existence of an illegality in the High Court's refusal to grant leave for appeal, contrary to section 47(1) of the Land Disputes Courts Act, constitutes good cause for extension of time, warranting exercise of the Court's discretion to grant the application.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • Applicant to file notice of appeal within thirty (30) days of pronouncement of this ruling
  • Costs of and incidental to this application shall abide by the outcome of the intended appeal