tanzania shipping agencies corporation tasac vs fredrick karia 2022 tzhcld 244 11 may 2022
The CMA lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter as the respondent was a public servant who had not exhausted statutory remedies under the Public Service Act.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- tanzania shipping agencies corporation tasac vs fredrick karia 2022 tzhcld 244 11 may 2022
- Parties
- Applicant: Tanzania Shipping Agencies Corporation (TASAC); Respondent: Fredrick Karia
- Court
- TANZLII
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 11 May 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Revision / Judgment
- Outcome
- application allowed; CMA proceedings quashed and award set aside
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction of CMA, Public Servant Remedies, Exhaustion of Statutory Remedies
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tanzania Shipping Agencies Corporation (TASAC)
Applicant
Fredrick Karia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Revision / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the CMA had jurisdiction over disputes involving public servants who have not exhausted remedies under the Public Service Act
Ratio Decidendi
The CMA lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter as the respondent was a public servant who had not exhausted statutory remedies under the Public Service Act.
Court Disposition
application allowed; CMA proceedings quashed and award set aside
Orders
- CMA proceedings quashed
- CMA award set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA LABOUR DIVISION AT PAR ES SALAAM REVISION NO. 468 OF 2021 TANZANIA SHIPPING AGENCIES CORPORATION (TASAC)....APPLICANT VERSUS FREDRICK KARIA....................................................... .^...fRESPONDENT JUDGMENT Mr. Mtae submitted that the CMA did not have jurisdiction since the complainant was a public servant who ought to have exhausted the remedies provided under the Public Service Act. He stated that the Respondent was terminated on 5th October 2017 when the provision of Section 32 A of the Public Service Act had already been added and i came into force. Citing the Court of Appeal decision in Tanzania Posts Corporation versus Dominic Kalangi, Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2022, Mr. Mate submitted that the position on the aspect is already settled that employee working in government entities are public servants and they need to exhaust remedies provided in the Public service Act before resorting to courts of law/^tt^^claims. In his reply, Advocate Nzowa was of the viewWat sincelhe Court of Appeal decision in Tanzania Posts CorporatipnWrsus^Dominic Kalangi is clear with binding effects to this court,'he did not have any dispute to the application. % Having heard the partieswubmissions and in the strength of the decision of the Courpb^ppeal in Tanzania Posts Corporation versus Dommic^Kallangi, Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2022 which interpretli^S.; 32fA of the Public Service Act (Cap 298 R.E 2019 as a^||K|ed in November 2016 by the Written Laws Miscellaneous Amendment Act (Act No 3 of 2016), I hereby hold that the CMA did not have jurisdiction to entertain the matter. I appreciate the wisdom of Nzowa, Advocate who has conceded to the application to save time. 2 As such I find that there are sufficient grounds established to call for and revise the CMA decision in Labour Dispute No. CMA/DSM/KIN/87/2009. Consequently, I revise the matter by quashing the proceedings and setting aside the said CMA award. Each party shall bear its own cost. It is so ordered. 3