sarafa sospita vs yahya mussa ibuma 1another 2022 tzhc 15110 15 december 2022

sarafa sospita vs yahya mussa ibuma 1another 2022 tzhc 15110 15 december 2022

The applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time due to an apparent illegality on the face of the record, namely her exclusion from proceedings affecting her interest as a joint owner and wife, which is of sufficient importance to warrant revision.

Citation
sarafa sospita vs yahya mussa ibuma 1another 2022 tzhc 15110 15 december 2022
Parties
Applicant: Surafa Sospita; 1st Respondent: Yahaya Mussa Ibuma; 2nd Respondent: Fatuma Idd Ibuma
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
15 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Illegality as Ground for Extension, Right to Be Heard, Administration of Estate
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Family Law Extension of Time Illegality as Ground for Extension Right to Be Heard Administration of Estate

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

Parties

Surafa Sospita

Applicant

Yahaya Mussa Ibuma

1st Respondent

Fatuma Idd Ibuma

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time to apply for revision
  2. 2 Whether there is an apparent illegality on the face of the record justifying extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for extension of time due to an apparent illegality on the face of the record, namely her exclusion from proceedings affecting her interest as a joint owner and wife, which is of sufficient importance to warrant revision.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Extension of time for thirty days from the date of the ruling to file the intended application for revision
  • Each party to bear their own costs