SEIPH FIKIRI MASINDE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA MUSOMA SUB-REGISTRY AT MUSOMA CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 13408 OF 2024 BETWEEN STEPH FIKIRI MASINDE...................................................................... APPLICANT VERSUS JUMA ADAMU RYAKUKA.................................................................. RESPONDENT RULING OF THE COURT 24/10/2024 & 21/11/2024 Kafanabo, J.: This is a ruling in respect of a preliminary objection raised by the Respondent herein against an application for reference arising from the decision of the Taxing Officer dated 08/05/2024 in Taxation Cause No. 000000446 of 2024 between the parties herein. The application is made by chamber summons supported by an affidavit of the Applicant. The substance of the Applicant's prayers includes the following: i. The court be pleased to examine by reference the decision of the Taxing Officer dated #h day of May 2024, in Taxation Cause No. 000000446 of2024 to see its legality and fairness of taxation. ii. The cost be provided for. Hi. Any other reiief/order (s) as the court may deem just and fit to grant. i However, before the said application could be heard on merits, the Respondent, on 29th July 2024, raised a preliminary objection to the effect that: That, the application for reference filed by the Applicant is incomplete and therefore defective for failure to comply with the provisions of Order 7 (2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order, G.N. No. 264 of 2015. It follows that, since preliminary points of law raised by the parties are heard and determined first, and taking into account that both parties have no legal representation, this Court ordered that the preliminary objection be disposed of by way of written submissions. Each party duly complied with the schedule of filing the written submissions. In support of the preliminary objection, the Respondent submitted that this application for reference is time-barred. The Respondent's submission was hinged on the argument that this application was filed by the Applicant on 7th June 2024 after being aggrieved by the ruling and order given by the Taxing Officer in the Taxation Cause No. 000000446 of 2024 which was pronounced on 8th May 2024. Moreover, it was submitted that reference from the decision of the Taxing Officer shall be filed within twenty-one (21) days from the date of the said decision pursuant to Order 7(2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order, G.N. No. 264 of 2015. It was also submitted that the decision subject matter of this reference was delivered on the 8th day of May 2024 and this application was filed on the 7th day of June 2024. This means that the application was filed after the expiry statutory twenty-one (21) days from 2 the date of the said decision. The Respondent thus prayed that the matter be dismissed relying on section 3(2) paragraph (c) of the Law of Limitation Act, [Cap 89, R.E 2019], and the case of Muganda Michael vs. Simon Liduckey, Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 23 of 2023. Opposing the preliminary objection raised by the Respondent, the Applicant submitted that the application was filed within the time prescribed by law as the application was filed on the 27th day of May 2024, twenty (20) days after the Taxing Officer's decision which was made on 8th May 2024, through an online filing system. It was also submitted that the law recognizes a document has been duly filed on the date it is submitted by a party in the online filing system and not otherwise relying on Rule 21(1) of the Judicature and Application of Laws (Electronic Filing) Rules G.N. No. 148 of 2018. In light of the above submissions by the parties, this court is called upon to determine the merits of the preliminary objection raised by the Respondent. Since the preliminary objection is hinged on the limitation of time, the relevant law prescribing the time within which to apply for reference from the decision of the Taxing Officer is Order 7(2) of the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015 which provides that: 7.-(1) Any party aggrieved by a decision of the Taxing officer, may file reference to a judge of the High Court. (2) A reference under order (1), shall be instituted by way of chamber summons supported by an affidavit and be filed within 21 days of from the date of the decision. 3 Therefore, as rightly argued by both parties the application for reference has to be filed within twenty-one (21) days from the date of the decision of the Taxing Officer. As can be deduced from the party's submissions, they part ways on the date of filing the application which makes a major difference in their reasoning in arriving at a conclusion regarding an answer to the question of whether the application was filed within the time prescribed by the law. At this juncture, it is important to set forth, as parties are duly aware, that currently, the judiciary has embraced the electronic filing of cases through the e-Case Management System. Moreover, the online or electronic filing system is regulated by law that is the Judicature and Application of Laws (Electronic Filing) Rules, 2018. Rule No. 21(1) of the said rules provides that: "A document shall be considered to have been filed if it is submitted through the electronic filing system before midnight, East African time, on the date it is submitted, unless a specific time is set by the court or it is rejected" In light of the above, it is clear that the application for reference has to be filed within 21 days from the date of the decision of the Taxing Officer and the application shall be considered to have been filed if it is submitted through the electronic filing system before midnight on the date it is submitted in the relevant filing system. Reverting to the present application, the parties are at one that the decision of the Taxing Officer was delivered on 8th May 2024 which means that, as per the rules, the deadline for filing the application for reference was 4 29/05/2024. In light of the record of the court, and as rightly argued by the Applicant, this application was filed on 27th May 2024 because that was the date it was submitted online, and the court admitted the application on the same date that is 27/05/2024. That is to say according to the records of this court the application was submitted and admitted on 27/05/2024. It follows that since the application was submitted online on 27th May 2024, this Court finds that this application for reference is not time-barred as alleged by the Applicant because it was duly filed within the twenty-one (21) days prescribed by the law. In light of the foregoing, the preliminary objection raised by the Respondent lacks merit and is hereby dismissed with costs. It is so ordered. The ruling was delivered in the presence of the Applicant and Japhet Pima Nyakutonya (donee of the power of attorney) for the Respondent. K. I. Kafanabo Judge 21/11/2024 5