attorney general vs miccos railway corporation another 2023 tzca 17868 21 november 2023

attorney general vs miccos railway corporation another 2023 tzca 17868 21 november 2023

The grounds advanced by the applicant do not amount to illegality apparent on the face of the record but are decisional errors or faults in evaluation of evidence; the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, and illegality as a ground is not established; thus, the application for extension of time fails.

Citation
attorney general vs miccos railway corporation another 2023 tzca 17868 21 november 2023
Parties
Applicant: The Attorney General; 1st Respondent: Micco's International (T) Ltd; 2nd Respondent: Tanzania Railway Corporation (Successor of the Reli Assets Holding Company)
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
21 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Revision
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Revision, Illegality as Ground for Extension, Procurement Law, Delay and Diligence
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Extension of Time Revision Illegality as Ground for Extension Procurement Law Delay and Diligence

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Attorney General

Applicant

Micco's International (T) Ltd

1st Respondent

Tanzania Railway Corporation (Successor of the Reli Assets Holding Company)

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Ruling on Application for Extension of Time to File Revision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sufficient cause exists to grant extension of time for filing revision
  2. 2 Whether alleged illegality in the High Court decision constitutes sufficient ground for extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds advanced by the applicant do not amount to illegality apparent on the face of the record but are decisional errors or faults in evaluation of evidence; the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, and illegality as a ground is not established; thus, the application for extension of time fails.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for extension of time is dismissed with costs