shoppers supermarket vs james anthony and others 2021 tzhcld 133 2 june 2021
The CMA award was improperly procured because only the first respondent testified and the claims of other respondents were neither specified nor proved; each respondent was required to prove their own claim.
- Citation
- shoppers supermarket vs james anthony and others 2021 tzhcld 133 2 june 2021
- Parties
- Applicant: Shoppers Supermarket; Respondents: James Anthony & 2 Others
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 2 June 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Labour Revision / Judgment
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Termination, Employment Contract, Representation in Proceedings, Burden of Proof
- Source Language
- English
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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Parties
Shoppers Supermarket
Applicant
James Anthony & 2 Others
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Labour Revision / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether James Anthony had mandate to testify on behalf of other respondents
- 2 Whether the CMA award was properly procured
Ratio Decidendi
The CMA award was improperly procured because only the first respondent testified and the claims of other respondents were neither specified nor proved; each respondent was required to prove their own claim.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- CMA award quashed and set aside
- CMA proceedings quashed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment