samson enocs kameeta vs pentecoste christian church buza 3 others 2022 tzhclandd 7 21 january 2022

samson enocs kameeta vs pentecoste christian church buza 3 others 2022 tzhclandd 7 21 january 2022

The applicant failed to comply with the court's order to amend the application to reflect the correct legal provisions, and repeated the same errors, amounting to abuse of court process. The application is incompetent and must be struck out with costs.

Citation
samson enocs kameeta vs pentecoste christian church buza 3 others 2022 tzhclandd 7 21 january 2022
Parties
Applicant: Samson Enocs Kameeta; 1st Respondent: Pentecoste Christian Church Buza; 2nd Respondent: Liberato Mbando; 3rd Respondent: Jamira Seif; 4th Respondent: Yohana Marco Mkinda
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
21 January 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
application struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Preliminary Objection, Wrong Citation of Law, Abuse of Court Process
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Extension of Time Preliminary Objection Wrong Citation of Law Abuse of Court Process

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Samson Enocs Kameeta

Applicant

Pentecoste Christian Church Buza

1st Respondent

Liberato Mbando

2nd Respondent

Jamira Seif

3rd Respondent

Yohana Marco Mkinda

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application is incompetent due to wrong citation of enabling provisions
  2. 2 Whether failure to comply with court order to amend application constitutes abuse of court process

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to comply with the court's order to amend the application to reflect the correct legal provisions, and repeated the same errors, amounting to abuse of court process. The application is incompetent and must be struck out with costs.

Court Disposition

application struck out with costs

Orders

  • Application struck out
  • Applicant to pay costs