malmo development coltd vs labour commissioner another 2021 tzhcld 46 7 december 2021

malmo development coltd vs labour commissioner another 2021 tzhcld 46 7 december 2021

The applicant failed to comply with the statutory procedure for objecting to the compliance order and did not seek condonation for late objection. The application for revision is misconceived as the proper remedy was to appeal, not to seek revision. The application is incompetent and must be struck out.

Citation
malmo development coltd vs labour commissioner another 2021 tzhcld 46 7 december 2021
Parties
Applicant: Malmo Development Co. Ltd; Respondent: The Labour Commissioner & Another
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
7 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Labour Revision Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Deputy Registrar's Decision
Outcome
Application struck out as incompetent
Legal Topics
Compliance Order, Execution Proceedings, Service of Process, Objection Procedure, Condonation, Revision Vs Appeal
Source Language
English
Labour Law Compliance Order Execution Proceedings Service of Process Objection Procedure Condonation Revision Vs Appeal

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Malmo Development Co. Ltd

Applicant

The Labour Commissioner & Another

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Revision Application / Ruling on Application for Revision of Deputy Registrar's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was properly served with the compliance order
  2. 2 Whether the applicant followed the correct procedure to challenge the compliance order and execution
  3. 3 Whether revision is the proper remedy

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to comply with the statutory procedure for objecting to the compliance order and did not seek condonation for late objection. The application for revision is misconceived as the proper remedy was to appeal, not to seek revision. The application is incompetent and must be struck out.

Court Disposition

Application struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • Application struck out