bank of tanzania vs labour commissioner another 2001 tzhc 5 1 august 2001
Leave to file substantive application out of time, as granted by the court, cures the default in late filing; application to strike out leave is not justified.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- bank of tanzania vs labour commissioner another 2001 tzhc 5 1 august 2001
- Parties
- Applicant: The Bank of Tanzania; Respondent: Labour Commissioner; Respondent: Attorney General
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 1 August 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Misc. Civil Cause / Application to Strike Out Leave for Failure to File Substantive Application on Time
- Outcome
- Application to strike out leave dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Prerogative Orders, Certiorari, Mandamus, Extension of Time
- 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
The Bank of Tanzania
Applicant
Labour Commissioner
Respondent
Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Misc. Civil Cause / Application to Strike Out Leave for Failure to File Substantive Application on Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave for prerogative orders should be struck out for failure to file substantive application within prescribed time
- 2 Whether subsequent leave to file out of time cures the default
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to file substantive application out of time, as granted by the court, cures the default in late filing; application to strike out leave is not justified.
Court Disposition
Application to strike out leave dismissed
Orders
- Substantive application to be filed within thirty days from date of order
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (D'SALAAM MAIN REGISTRY) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISC. CIVIL CAUSE NO.51 OF 1999 THE BANK OF TANZANIA APPLICANT VERSUS 1. LABOUR COMMISSIONER 2. ATTORNEY GENERAL RESPONDENTS After leave to file application for prerogative orders of certiorari and mandamus was granted, the court ordered the respondent to file the substantive application by 31/12/99. In the present proceedings the applicants are requesting the court to strike out the said leave for respondent's failure to file the substantive application by 31/12/99 as ordered. In reply, respondent admits that it failed to file the application within the prescribed time. However, it contends that the application was filed on 29/2/2000 after the court, on 3/2/2000, had granted it leave to file the said application out of time. The applicants are on the other hand contending that at to ignore most part of their argument. The fact on record is that applicant was one of bidders for the tenders floated by the first respondent. Applicant is challenging the decision of second respondent of not awarding the said tender to him on the ground that it was not done fairly. For example applicant is alleging that second respondent took into account matters which ought not to have been taken, that serious legal issues for judicial detem1ination. On this ground leave is accordingly granted. The substantive application to be filed within thirty days from the date ( M«\'L.......:,\ itiEmi JAJI KIONGOZI. For the applicant: Msafiri For the respondent: Miss Otaro