tanzania fish processors ltd vs eusto k ntagalinda 2020 tzca 237 10 april 2020

tanzania fish processors ltd vs eusto k ntagalinda 2020 tzca 237 10 april 2020

The applicant failed to account for the actual delay of fourteen days after the previous application was struck out and did not establish any of the grounds for review under Rule 66(1) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules. Therefore, the preconditions for extension of time were not met.

Citation
tanzania fish processors ltd vs eusto k ntagalinda 2020 tzca 237 10 april 2020
Parties
Applicant: Tanzania Fish Processors Limited; Respondent: Eusto K. Ntagalinda
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
10 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Review
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Review of Judgment, Affidavit Defects, Technical Delay, Right to Be Heard
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Review of Judgment Affidavit Defects Technical Delay Right to Be Heard

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tanzania Fish Processors Limited

Applicant

Eusto K. Ntagalinda

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to Apply for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant showed good cause for delay in applying for review
  2. 2 Whether the applicant established grounds for review under Rule 66(1) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to account for the actual delay of fourteen days after the previous application was struck out and did not establish any of the grounds for review under Rule 66(1) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules. Therefore, the preconditions for extension of time were not met.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for extension of time to apply for review is dismissed with costs