alexander j barunguza vs law school of tanzania 2022 tzhc 14012 24 october 2022

alexander j barunguza vs law school of tanzania 2022 tzhc 14012 24 october 2022

The petition is incompetent as the petitioner has not exhausted available remedies, specifically an appeal pending before the Court of Appeal regarding the same subject matter. Section 8(2) of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act bars the High Court from exercising jurisdiction when adequate means of redress are available under other laws. The prayers for live-streaming and temporary injunction are denied due to lack of governing rules and evidentiary proof, respectively.

Citation
alexander j barunguza vs law school of tanzania 2022 tzhc 14012 24 october 2022
Parties
Petitioner: Alexander J. Barunguza; 1st Respondent: The Law School of Tanzania; 2nd Respondent: Hon Judge Benhajj S. Masoud; 3rd Respondent: The Attorney General
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
petition struck out as incompetent
Legal Topics
Open Justice, Injunctions, Exhaustion of Remedies, Judicial Review, Access to Justice
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Education Law Open Justice Injunctions Exhaustion of Remedies Judicial Review Access to 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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander J. Barunguza

Petitioner

The Law School of Tanzania

1st Respondent

Hon Judge Benhajj S. Masoud

2nd Respondent

The Attorney General

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Preliminary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should the proceedings be publicly broadcasted via live-streaming?
  2. 2 Should a temporary injunction be issued to suspend ongoing training sessions by the 1st respondent?
  3. 3 Is the petition maintainable while an appeal is pending regarding the same subject matter under section 8(2) of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act?

Ratio Decidendi

The petition is incompetent as the petitioner has not exhausted available remedies, specifically an appeal pending before the Court of Appeal regarding the same subject matter. Section 8(2) of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act bars the High Court from exercising jurisdiction when adequate means of redress are available under other laws. The prayers for live-streaming and temporary injunction are denied due to lack of governing rules and evidentiary proof, respectively.

Court Disposition

petition struck out as incompetent

Orders

  • Petition struck out without costs
  • Prayers for live-streaming and temporary injunction denied