policarpy maro vs anna peter 2016 tzca 2083 26 february 2016

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide security for costs or a firm undertaking as required by Rule 11(2)(d) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: policarpy maro vs anna peter 2016 tzca 2083 26 february 2016
Parties: Applicant: Policarpy Maro; Respondent: Anna Peter
Court: TZCA
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 26 February 2016
Procedural Posture: Civil Application / Application for Stay of Execution
Outcome: application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics: Stay of Execution, Security for Costs, Appeals
Source Language: english

Civil Procedure Land Law Stay of Execution Security for Costs Appeals

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

Policarpy Maro

Applicant

Anna Peter

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Application for Stay of Execution

Legal Issues

1 Whether the applicant satisfied all conditions for grant of stay of execution under Rule 11(2)(d) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to provide security for costs or a firm undertaking as required by Rule 11(2)(d) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2009.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

application dismissed
costs awarded to respondent

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.