seifu bakari kisinga vs abdulrahman ally hamisi 2020 tzhclandd 2223 28 september 2020

seifu bakari kisinga vs abdulrahman ally hamisi 2020 tzhclandd 2223 28 september 2020

The law does not specify a time limit for the validity of a statutory notice under section 106 of the Local Government (Urban Authority) Act No. 8 of 1982; therefore, the notice previously served remains valid and the suit is not incompetent for want of a fresh notice.

Citation
seifu bakari kisinga vs abdulrahman ally hamisi 2020 tzhclandd 2223 28 september 2020
Parties
Plaintiff: Seifu Bakari Kisinga; 1st Defendant: Abdulrahman Ally Hamisi; 2nd Defendant: Temeke Municipal Council
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
28 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Preliminary objection dismissed
Legal Topics
Statutory Notice Requirement, Preliminary Objection, Competency of Suit
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Local Government Law Land Law Statutory Notice Requirement Preliminary Objection Competency of Suit

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seifu Bakari Kisinga

Plaintiff

Abdulrahman Ally Hamisi

1st Defendant

Temeke Municipal Council

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the suit is incompetent for lack of statutory notice to the 2nd defendant under section 106 of the Local Government (Urban Authority) Act No. 8 of 1982
  2. 2 Whether the preliminary objection raised is a pure point of law

Ratio Decidendi

The law does not specify a time limit for the validity of a statutory notice under section 106 of the Local Government (Urban Authority) Act No. 8 of 1982; therefore, the notice previously served remains valid and the suit is not incompetent for want of a fresh notice.

Court Disposition

Preliminary objection dismissed

Orders

  • Preliminary objection dismissed for want of merit
  • Costs to follow event