ramadhani said vs shabani andalu 2017 tzhc 2185 28 february 2017

ramadhani said vs shabani andalu 2017 tzhc 2185 28 february 2017

The applicant's reason for delay, waiting for a copy of the judgment, is not sufficient because the law does not require annexing the judgment to the petition of appeal. Therefore, no sufficient reason for the delay was shown.

Citation
ramadhani said vs shabani andalu 2017 tzhc 2185 28 february 2017
Parties
Applicant: Ramadhani Said; Respondent: Shabani Andalu
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
28 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeals From District Court, Procedural Requirements for Appeal
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeals From District Court Procedural Requirements for Appeal

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ramadhani Said

Applicant

Shabani Andalu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient reasons for delay in filing appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's reason for delay, waiting for a copy of the judgment, is not sufficient because the law does not require annexing the judgment to the petition of appeal. Therefore, no sufficient reason for the delay was shown.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for extension of time is dismissed
  • No order for costs