tanzania breweries limited vs the minister for labour youth development others 2023 tzca 17970 14 december 2023

tanzania breweries limited vs the minister for labour youth development others 2023 tzca 17970 14 december 2023

The alleged error regarding mandatory summary dismissal was not manifest on the face of the record; the penalty was permissible, not mandatory, and the application sought to re-open the appeal rather than correct a patent mistake. No miscarriage of justice occurred.

Citation
tanzania breweries limited vs the minister for labour youth development others 2023 tzca 17970 14 december 2023
Parties
Applicant: Tanzania Breweries Limited; First Respondent: The Minister for Labour and Youth Development; Second Respondent: The Attorney General; Third Respondent: Pendo Masasi
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
14 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Dismissal, Disciplinary Code, Manifest Error, Review of Appellate Judgment
Source Language
English
Labour Law Employment Law Administrative Law Summary Dismissal Disciplinary Code Manifest Error Review of Appellate Judgment

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tanzania Breweries Limited

Applicant

The Minister for Labour and Youth Development

First Respondent

The Attorney General

Second Respondent

Pendo Masasi

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application for Review / Ruling on Application for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court's prior judgment contained a manifest error on the face of the record resulting in miscarriage of justice
  2. 2 Whether summary dismissal was a mandatory penalty under the Security of Employment Act, 1964 for the offence committed

Ratio Decidendi

The alleged error regarding mandatory summary dismissal was not manifest on the face of the record; the penalty was permissible, not mandatory, and the application sought to re-open the appeal rather than correct a patent mistake. No miscarriage of justice occurred.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • application for review dismissed
  • no costs or further orders specified