20170706 TZCA Tanga 1

20170706 TZCA Tanga 1

The application for review was filed 98 days after the judgment, exceeding the 60-day limit prescribed by Rule 66(3) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009, without any extension of time sought or granted. Therefore, the application was time barred and not properly before the Court, warranting its striking out.

Citation
20170706 TZCA Tanga 1
Parties
Applicant: Thomas Mlambivu; Respondent: The Republic
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
6 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Review / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Application struck out as time barred.
Legal Topics
Review of Judgment, Limitation Periods, Defective Affidavit
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Appellate Procedure Review of Judgment Limitation Periods Defective Affidavit

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Mlambivu

Applicant

The Republic

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Review / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the application for review was filed within the prescribed time limit under Rule 66(3) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009
  2. 2 Whether the supporting affidavit was incurably defective under the Notaries Public and Commissioner for Oaths Act

Ratio Decidendi

The application for review was filed 98 days after the judgment, exceeding the 60-day limit prescribed by Rule 66(3) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009, without any extension of time sought or granted. Therefore, the application was time barred and not properly before the Court, warranting its striking out.

Court Disposition

Application struck out as time barred.

Orders

  • The application for review is struck out.