mbaraka yahaya ramadhani vs district executive director of bagamoyo district council and another 2022 tzhc 670 17 march 2022

mbaraka yahaya ramadhani vs district executive director of bagamoyo district council and another 2022 tzhc 670 17 march 2022

The applicant established a prima facie case by showing interest as the owner of the cancelled permit and timely filing. Leave is granted to apply for orders of mandamus and prohibition.

Citation
mbaraka yahaya ramadhani vs district executive director of bagamoyo district council and another 2022 tzhc 670 17 march 2022
Parties
Applicant: Mbaraka Yahaya Ramadhani; 1st Respondent: District Executive Director of Bagamoyo District Council; 2nd Respondent: The Attorney General
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
17 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave for Judicial Review / Ruling on Application for Leave
Outcome
leave granted
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Mandamus, Prohibition, Ultra Vires, Licensing, Local Government Powers
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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mbaraka Yahaya Ramadhani

Applicant

District Executive Director of Bagamoyo District Council

1st Respondent

The Attorney General

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave for Judicial Review / Ruling on Application for Leave

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established a prima facie case for leave to apply for orders of mandamus and prohibition against the suspension of his mining licence by the 1st respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant established a prima facie case by showing interest as the owner of the cancelled permit and timely filing. Leave is granted to apply for orders of mandamus and prohibition.

Court Disposition

leave granted

Orders

  • Leave granted to the applicant to file application for prerogative orders of mandamus and prohibition
  • No order as to costs