nishati plus limited vs nice catering co ltd 2023 tzca 17660 27 september 2023

nishati plus limited vs nice catering co ltd 2023 tzca 17660 27 september 2023

The omission by the successor judge to assign reasons for taking over the matter did not offend Order XVIII rule 10 (1) of the Civil Procedure Code, as no evidence had been recorded by the predecessor judge and no prejudice was occasioned to the appellant.

Citation
nishati plus limited vs nice catering co ltd 2023 tzca 17660 27 september 2023
Parties
Appellant: Nishati Plus Limited; Respondent: Nice Catering Co. Ltd
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
27 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Successor Judge Assignment, Default Judgment, Prejudice From Procedural Omission
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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nishati Plus Limited

Appellant

Nice Catering Co. Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the successor judge's failure to assign reasons for taking over the case was fatal and prejudicial under Order XVIII rule 10 (1) of the Civil Procedure Code

Ratio Decidendi

The omission by the successor judge to assign reasons for taking over the matter did not offend Order XVIII rule 10 (1) of the Civil Procedure Code, as no evidence had been recorded by the predecessor judge and no prejudice was occasioned to the appellant.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.