Tanzania Judgment

TZHC

19980904 TZHC Dar es Salaam2

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The application fails because no points of law or fact were established to warrant certification for appeal.

Court disposition

dismissed

Orders

  • application dismissed with costs

02

Material facts

Parties

Shani Ayurj

Applicant

SRSU'3

Respondent Counsel: Mr. Ukwonga

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil / Application for Leave to Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Applicant claims overwhelming chances of success if leave is granted, relying on affidavit evidence and written arguments.
Respondent
Respondent argues that the court's prior decision does not raise points of law or fact and the application is doomed to fail.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Civil procedure rules

    Applicant must establish existence of points of law or fact for certification to Court of Appeal.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The application fails because no points of law or fact were established to warrant certification for appeal.

Court disposition

dismissed

  • application dismissed with costs

Source and reliance status

TZHC · 4 September 1998

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

TZHC

Judgment· 4 September 1998

19980904 TZHC Dar es Salaam2

.... _...,__ _ DAR ES Si'..::,.\..·-.l'•i DISTRICT REG:::.JTRY --;-, . . '-4T' · _.;1. ., : . .n- \. --'~ ~ ~ ;:;'-::: .:._.JJ,1. , .: L i ,-, 1'-'1 j :!.,rl. (FrDm Origirnl fWi 1 S Court F::i:SU _·,J Cj_viJ_ Case No.21/92)

SHANI AYURJ V.SRSU'.'3

RULING The applicant is t';e: .:.::.:.':2n,i;2nt j_r:;_ Civil Case i'Jo.70 of 1997 at the Court of Resident rv,agi::t:_~·::.t:.::, ~~is,,,tu. After he had called four ·1.':.-~n2232s iL (ii!', .:L_j:~'---'Lc.0 he filed a chamber a}-,Pl.ic::-~til· n praying i:L·,t the =~,:~':lceediri..gs be stnyed until Criruinal C·~:se Na.1089 :<: i-:~r:,6 :1t the application was ::;_i_sn.ised ;::ind o.n app:::J.1 against the order disr.1issing t~1Jt sppli.c,~rci,:-,n w:::is itself dismissed by this Cour-t, K:1123.::y:::, ? • This c:)U:;: t 0 i::_,_:,J_;-~ that the Crilliinal Case has LJ ::::.ir12c t rel.c've:.::1c2 -C') t'.:12 civil c 9 se whic·h, at any r9te, has r-e9.ched :::tL 3.,~v'.lnced st8.t,e. It is froIT: that decision ·that the a ::•r1L.c.:.::·.:.·~ ,3•2GEs leave to appeal to the Ccurt of Appeal. No•,1 r t::iis a1.=-1Jlicaticn relo:Ls second aj,)pea.1,. T,D 8. The appJ_ic,:,nL has to establish ·that there are points of lm, c: r -. U.x,::=:c-t l::nv and fact v,rhich will be certified to the >: ;_:rt of A.PPec,l. I-'Jy exan,i n:~ ti._; ::.1 ,:: :'.:' th-= 3.ffidavi t evidence supporti1.:.g th:.:: .:::.:~;-lic:-:tion ::';.s :.::_2111 c.::3 written ,, arguments contain no raore than his b-::~_L,i' -t.:.·:-_-'.; h,=:: has overwhealming ehances of succ2.:;s if tiij_:_:; ::1 __ ;.l_"'..·'.:=:. c~_on will succeed. the respondent, has pointe.-: out th::: iT.e:r:::: .:=:l:~ , --~.::...)n that this court cr:r-2d wn.0 :,:-: ' ; cannot be consicL,:-\.::'1 to o,.:.: law and fact. So that ti12 ~'l.PPlicatis n- n,ust fail as it is doomed to. ... 2 In the re$ult the application i~ dismissed with costs. Delivered. J ~ M. J.ViACr~i~NJA

JUDGE 4/9/98 In person: For Arplic3rrt Mr •. Ukwonga Advocate for Re sporn.10 nt. CGrtified true copy of the Origi::.,al.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

No structured authorities are available for this judgment.

Refer to the full judgment and official source for citations that have not yet been extracted.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.