peter kidole vs republic 2013 tzca 465 6 august 2013

peter kidole vs republic 2013 tzca 465 6 august 2013

The application for review did not disclose any grounds under Rule 66(1) and merely sought to revisit matters already decided, which is not permissible; therefore, the application lacked merit and was dismissed.

Citation
peter kidole vs republic 2013 tzca 465 6 august 2013
Parties
Applicant: Peter Kidole; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
6 August 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review of Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Review of Appellate Judgment, Criteria for Review, Finality of Litigation
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Appellate Procedure Review of Appellate Judgment Criteria for Review Finality of Litigation

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

Parties

Peter Kidole

Applicant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review of Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for review met the criteria under Rule 66(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009

Ratio Decidendi

The application for review did not disclose any grounds under Rule 66(1) and merely sought to revisit matters already decided, which is not permissible; therefore, the application lacked merit and was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for review is dismissed.