paulina thomas vs prosper joseph mutayoba 2018 tzca 510 25 april 2018

paulina thomas vs prosper joseph mutayoba 2018 tzca 510 25 april 2018

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to establish irreparable loss and did not furnish security for due performance of the decree as required by Rule 11(2)(d) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009.

Citation
paulina thomas vs prosper joseph mutayoba 2018 tzca 510 25 april 2018
Parties
Applicant: Paulina Thomas; Respondent: Prosper Joseph Mutayoba
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
25 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Security for Due Performance, Irreparable Loss, Appeal Procedures
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Stay of Execution Security for Due Performance Irreparable Loss Appeal Procedures

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paulina Thomas

Applicant

Prosper Joseph Mutayoba

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant satisfied the cumulative conditions for grant of stay of execution under Rule 11(2) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009
  2. 2 Whether offering the suit premises as security is sufficient under the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to establish irreparable loss and did not furnish security for due performance of the decree as required by Rule 11(2)(d) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for stay of execution dismissed
  • Applicant to pay costs