frady tajiri chawe vs tanesco 2023 tzca 17887 23 november 2023

frady tajiri chawe vs tanesco 2023 tzca 17887 23 november 2023

The applicants failed to account for each day of the four months' delay between the issuance of the certificate of delay and the filing of the application for extension of time, as required by law. The absence of an affidavit from the Registrar to support the applicants' claims was fatal. The alleged illegalities did not meet the threshold for extension of time as they were merely grounds of appeal.

Citation
frady tajiri chawe vs tanesco 2023 tzca 17887 23 november 2023
Parties
Applicants: Frady Tajiri Chawe (As Administrator of the estate of the late Donatus Chawe Sanga) & 443 Others; Respondent: TANESCO
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
23 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Reference / Reference From Decision of Single Justice of Appeal on Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Technical Delay, Affidavit Requirements, Certificate of Delay, Appeal Procedure
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Labour Law Extension of Time Technical Delay Affidavit Requirements Certificate of Delay Appeal Procedure

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frady Tajiri Chawe (As Administrator of the estate of the late Donatus Chawe Sanga) & 443 Others

Applicants

TANESCO

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Reference / Reference From Decision of Single Justice of Appeal on Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants sufficiently accounted for the four months' delay between issuance of certificate of delay and filing of application for extension of time
  2. 2 Whether the absence of an affidavit from the Registrar was fatal to the application
  3. 3 Whether alleged illegalities in the High Court decision justified extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to account for each day of the four months' delay between the issuance of the certificate of delay and the filing of the application for extension of time, as required by law. The absence of an affidavit from the Registrar to support the applicants' claims was fatal. The alleged illegalities did not meet the threshold for extension of time as they were merely grounds of appeal.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs