mwananchi gold co ltd others vs reginald abraham mengi others 2010 tzhc 426 17 august 2010

mwananchi gold co ltd others vs reginald abraham mengi others 2010 tzhc 426 17 august 2010

The court retains jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit despite expiry of the speed track period, as the delay was not attributable to the plaintiffs but to the court's failure to provide assessors; striking out the suit would be unjust.

Citation
mwananchi gold co ltd others vs reginald abraham mengi others 2010 tzhc 426 17 august 2010
Parties
Plaintiff: Mwananchi Gold Co Ltd; Plaintiff: Joseph Sinde Warioba; Plaintiff: Yusuph Mushi; Plaintiff: Vulfrida Grace Mahalu; Defendant: Reginald Abraham Mengi; Defendant: Mbaraka Islam; Defendant: The Editor This Day Newspaper; Defendant: The Editor Kulikoni Newspaper; Defendant: Media Solutions Limited
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
17 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection overruled
Legal Topics
Scheduling Order, Speed Track System, Jurisdiction, Defamation, Preliminary Objection, Extension of Time
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Media Law Defamation Scheduling Order Speed Track System Jurisdiction Preliminary Objection Extension of Time

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mwananchi Gold Co Ltd

Plaintiff

Joseph Sinde Warioba

Plaintiff

Yusuph Mushi

Plaintiff

Vulfrida Grace Mahalu

Plaintiff

Reginald Abraham Mengi

Defendant

Mbaraka Islam

Defendant

The Editor This Day Newspaper

Defendant

The Editor Kulikoni Newspaper

Defendant

Media Solutions Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to continue hearing the suit after expiry of the scheduling order and speed track period
  2. 2 Whether the suit should be struck out with costs due to lapse of the speed track period

Ratio Decidendi

The court retains jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit despite expiry of the speed track period, as the delay was not attributable to the plaintiffs but to the court's failure to provide assessors; striking out the suit would be unjust.

Court Disposition

preliminary objection overruled

Orders

  • Each party to bear its own costs.
  • Parties and/or their advocates to appear before court on 10th October, 2010 for fixing a fresh period for hearing and determination of the suit.