paulo nzimano vs peter nzimano 2006 tzhc 336 2 may 2006
The appeal was filed outside the prescribed thirty-day period without leave of the court, rendering it time-barred.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- paulo nzimano vs peter nzimano 2006 tzhc 336 2 may 2006
- Parties
- Appellant: Paulo Nzimano; Respondent: Peter Nzimano
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 2 May 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / High Court Appellate Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed as time-barred
- Legal Topics
- Criminal Trespass, Limitation Period for Appeal, Appeal Procedure
- Source Language
- english
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Paulo Nzimano
Appellant
Peter Nzimano
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Appellate Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal was filed within the statutory limitation period
- 2 Whether leave was obtained to file an out-of-time appeal
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was filed outside the prescribed thirty-day period without leave of the court, rendering it time-barred.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed as time-barred
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT BUKOBA (PC) CRIM INAL APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2003 (Arising from (PC) CRIMINAL APP. NO. 33/2000 A N D BUKOBA DISTRICT CO U RT CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 67/2001) (Before: I.N.B. Bashemela, Esq. PDM) PAULO N ZIM ANO = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = AP P E L L A N T VERSUS PETER NZIM ANO = = = = = = = = = = r e SPO N D E N T JUDGM ENT This is a PC Criminal appeal. It arises from Bukoba prim ary court sitting at Katoro. In that court the appellant Paulo Nzimano was charged with criminal trespass C/S 299 o f the Penal Code. At the end o f the trial he was acquitted. Aggrieved by that finding, Peter Nzimano the com plainant appealed to the district court o f Bukoba. The district court allowed the appeal. It convicted the appellant - Paulo N zim ano. He was given a suspended sentence. The appellant was aggrieved, hence this appeal. But this appeal was lodged on the 40th day after the date o f the decision. The judgm ent o f the first appellate district court was delivered on 22/3/2002; whereas this appeal was lodged on 2/5/2002. In law such an appeal ought to have been filed within 30 days after the date o f the decision vide S. 25(1 )(a) o f the MCA, 1984 [Now Cap. 11 R.E.]. The section reads> 25(1) Save as hereinafter provided - (a) in proceedings o f a criminal nature, any person convicted o f an offence, or, in any case where a district court confirms the acquittal o f any person by a prim ary court or substitutes an acquittal for a conviction, the complainant or the Director o f Public Prosecutions:- If aggrieved by the decision or order o f a district court in the exercise o f its appellate or revisional jurisdiction may, within thirty days after the date o f the decision or order, appeal there from to the High C ourt. [Emphasise Mine] Since this appeal was filed outside the prescribed time o f 30 days and without leave o f this court, the same is time barred. The appeal Judgment delivered today 2nd day o f May, 2006 in the presence o f both parties and Mr. Katabalwa learned counsel for the Respondent. A T BUKOBA 2/5/2006