nathan alex vs valerian crispin mlay another 2018 tzhc 94 22 february 2018

nathan alex vs valerian crispin mlay another 2018 tzhc 94 22 february 2018

The procedural irregularities alleged did not cause injustice or affect the merits, as the application was properly supported and received by the Secretary. The appellant was not denied the right to be heard, as all issues were apparent from the affidavits and evidence. The documentary evidence annexed to affidavits formed part of the record. The appellant's conduct constituted professional misconduct, and the sentence of suspension for five years was appropriate.

Citation
nathan alex vs valerian crispin mlay another 2018 tzhc 94 22 february 2018
Parties
Appellant: Nathan Alex; 1st Respondent: Valerian Crispin Mlay; 2nd Respondent: Advocates Committee
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
22 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Professional Misconduct, Advocate's Fees, Procedural Compliance, Natural Justice
Source Language
English
Legal Profession Professional Discipline Professional Misconduct Advocate's Fees Procedural Compliance Natural Justice

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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nathan Alex

Appellant

Valerian Crispin Mlay

1st Respondent

Advocates Committee

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Advocates Committee proceedings were irregular for procedural non-compliance
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was denied the right to be heard
  3. 3 Whether the conviction for professional misconduct was supported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The procedural irregularities alleged did not cause injustice or affect the merits, as the application was properly supported and received by the Secretary. The appellant was not denied the right to be heard, as all issues were apparent from the affidavits and evidence. The documentary evidence annexed to affidavits formed part of the record. The appellant's conduct constituted professional misconduct, and the sentence of suspension for five years was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Suspension of appellant from practice for five years confirmed