skyward construction coltd vs cleo eswai 2022 tzhcld 38 28 february 2022

skyward construction coltd vs cleo eswai 2022 tzhcld 38 28 february 2022

The applicant failed to attach or provide evidence of the alleged illegality or lack of jurisdiction in the CMA proceedings. The applicant did not prove that the settlement deed was not signed by an authorized officer or that the persons who signed lacked authority. The alleged illegality was not apparent on the face of the record. Therefore, no sufficient cause was shown for extension of time.

Citation
skyward construction coltd vs cleo eswai 2022 tzhcld 38 28 february 2022
Parties
Applicant: Skyward Construction Co. Limited; Respondent: Cleo E. Swai
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
28 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Jurisdiction, Settlement Agreements, Illegality as Ground for Extension
Source Language
English
Labour Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Jurisdiction Settlement Agreements Illegality as Ground for Extension

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Skyward Construction Co. Limited

Applicant

Cleo E. Swai

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has shown sufficient cause for extension of time to file an application for revision against a CMA settlement deed
  2. 2 Whether alleged illegality in the CMA proceedings constitutes a ground for extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to attach or provide evidence of the alleged illegality or lack of jurisdiction in the CMA proceedings. The applicant did not prove that the settlement deed was not signed by an authorized officer or that the persons who signed lacked authority. The alleged illegality was not apparent on the face of the record. Therefore, no sufficient cause was shown for extension of time.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for extension of time is dismissed for want of merit.