25062001 TZHC Dar es Salaam

lN THE llIGE-I COURT OF TANZANL\ AT DAR ES SALA.l\N ~~-------= ·--=r-- . CIVIL REVL3ICN NO. 69 OF 1998 UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALJ,AM • • • • APPLICANT Versus EDMUND A. M\d.A.Si\.G.4 & l~ OTHEHS • • • RESPONDENT RULING -; ... -. ··~ g T'nis is an exparte Ruling in respect of an application for bill of costs for taxation amounting from High Court Civil Revision No. 69 of 1998. Counsel Mselem for the applicant hereto rn/s University of Dar- es Salaam argued the present application fDr taxation tabling a quantum bill of Tshs.;1, 10:1,000/= categorised in '25 items. . .. . .... . .. . ..,. Mr. Mselem submission ~13s' ·oategoriicaify brief, stating that the natter originated fr.om. the ,Kj,sutu ~• s court in which the judgment .. .- . . ; . ! - '·~ ; • ~.,..,. debtor were cr.allenging from the .Dar es Salaam University in the cause of which the. stat~~ lm'1er •,c_o~ <4-~~~e~ _them ~e: iJtSta~ement but upon the requisite revision wlrlck µ, ~~;-)3ubject of the ruling the lower courts decision.was -_ . ·•. qµaebed on.. gr9µnds . ·~• .· ·.....,, - that ..".!..l., ~.., < •- the :: +ow~r court hl,d no ~ jurisdiction t.o.~,M:ain the matter. Going into the substantiVEr a;rgume~t .counsel Mselem observed tba t the matter was so taxing- ~use. it' lnvolved prerogative orders and- therefore ~. ... . .a detailed research was/had to be made in essence the ,.,_ counsel i\lrther observed that therefore the factual component is that . . • . , . • • ~ - ' ' .. ,1~ I • • . ~ - •. ,...._ the· matter cannot be qualified but ·adna;ttedly insisted that the ·· i}lStruction fee of one mi.Iifori wa.s pra·cticaliy' and considerably • fair in the circumstances. otherwise as for the rest of the i teni from i tern 2 - 25 are not on the. _Hig,.1 s~~~ ,a~ thei~ y~~ye~4. ~hpt . j ,.,.. . ~ . . ... _f --~·· I,.,! ~L ... f ,._ I>- .. .,,...... -..... they be' taxed . as presented. . i ' ~ Perhaps before --I ii~datgi;1Jh ,~·~s~s~tng the merits' of' couneel Msel~m.~ submi~-:>i<?~l• _1 I may ~4~h,,,~o .?,:t:~~w· :p!Y. fo_qus ,well pqcJ{ t,o ju~tify ~ • ~ own premise of al~ow~~g ·•-•• 11. ·. •T ~ rhe I• • •.· ~- vlo.. < - "' ~~\~~F ~~. :f?J::?q_~7d ~XP.81:~~ aJ~ it ,4~.~d• ._ -,,_ • .; ~ '-, ••·- '- ,._, , 1 , .,_. t ·.' ) _ ., ... a'!sb'lo ev .d- s~1o'IO'l<J. bDv fovn:.t" i I 02°jj i.;6id ~xG;t oa c.! r:-·.' -:ro;t-t '"':.ffi oti.t :t s:H o.d;t 0:,nocos rd: ohL,11 ocf o;t bGii\c::nw rio-r;;,oas·J: bl.r.•.:,j9!; a :)'J.~~£4t~?!f-:'~ ;:;-cr{j el: J!1Gr:oq'.'iloo IcJJioc1 c:U :no1~·!'.:>riJ 5 {:iif:J· t0Trn•,:~do •13rt·J-r!rft .{,.1oruJ00 l . . ( ·~ [!r- ,.. ~ ~ - r I - • • • .ti1 r ·t (J j. . . ,,. • J" ',. , . .. . . i . '. ~ • s:fJ 1--]-{f ·!fs;r·:.d2J'!..c '(;.CBsJ·Jl:<:1151.: ~.ucr flaL1:.t':r~,1l9; ~,d ·t:'.>tll~"oJ""'.:::.,i:-':tc~':1 -:;r!·-♦· a~ .,1 •o.i: iv-,s:i'. J.r,••'.) .;...,._\DJ!-;:: ··1.·•· -.i-~-.... •, r1,_,L··.:.x..._,.,. ... · t ,, ··. <:: • '\,1dl5'!G1J.i:3i'tc,o brr£ \~.tJ_nono·.,,,1(.1' ?.1!-.r i'Itf.i:'.H1t!' Mo·-r'd oS.t !folJ:i1tti':ft!<l:' m~= J: ~d:.t '!,) fa::>'! 9r{j- '! ?l er, G:' _r; •'D<:tO • 83 ::J.!1G:f3.'fl;JO'I.[:) ::d J ,i~ •(:[l,,!f ,fQi-I:.r b~tr-'1,· '!.forl:t ~--- f,bi;:. 4r •::; .,r(i ,i(_,_ fon_.YH, i:_; - '.', ffleH~ m~vr't ....'l,~~ .. c -;=,;.[.Q."1.:;\.U. ~\·-i 1,,.··~""'·#- ~ ,f~f.11. :-it,.•.~:,.,.~ .. 1·~.•.l..;•~' 1r__.r!...,~.~ .b()j,1ea9•1\, er, b;;1xi.;:t s<J x:nrlJ- ·.,,<.J.,;,.;t m::-.l::t1..r:.:-..;:t "'1n1 t'ot•·•,.t~-. · 1"'· .. -:;- .11", ..:::, ·,•1·1., ..• ""!1- L t,r:: ·-4-,~ f 'J' V .·,_.,:, . .,. ,. ~ . ,.•, t. 1" .\,\ · ,;~• ' €1 " ; r , • ·y Isam10:i "'le, ,d'.r'!::1:ii"":.01 ;/11, ·:R..,~J-:": ''..:,·.;;t~irt:,; .i! .1. :;;'ttfrQcf 2:1icJP:!:Y1' '' 1 1 ' -y;1.i:faul: ,_p-.t ~o~.d .J.Jow, 2JJO:>'t··,t"·-.~·~i:!'i:.,:,J,~ .-:'.f-i, v::,:r, i .cm.i:,,n.tr:-iJim 2,m0i~x1ri Jf!J l,).; ... ~.J .,,r; ... 3c-,~ t· ~i.l. °i "• '!.., ~...1.:, .. ~}..:.!~JU~i f·J. ,.... ""'t . ~ : 4 ,.,: ~. :.:., ·./-: : 1 4 .,.: ') · :I ... ) ! • ;. 1.· I..._ l .., ... j~~.,' ,t ..,; .. I ' ... t • { \.· 1 . L (J ....... ,.. .,' With one respect let aJ.one the exparte proof granted to the counsel on 13/7/2001 not withstanding, probably I may have gone further to dismissing the matter on tr.iat same day had both parties not appeared though seryed, consiclring th::: time I pin that has since elapsed when thii:, matter it came u:p for taxation,. i.e. way back from 4/11/99, to date which is cmite a long time indeed to lt-'3Ve a ID:1tter simply lying ide in our registry~ Now while both parties did acknowledge receipt of the notice of date of taxation issued on 25/6/2001 an<l received by ¥.iagessa and Co. !idvocate on 27/6/2001 and the applic~nts counsel on 28/6/2001 respectively for n matter which was.uled to proceed on 13/7/2001. Would say that ¼~s undoubtedly suffi~t and quite an effective service made upon the parties, hence in the absence of any good explanation I would have seen no reason not to dismi,ss it had both parties not appeared just as I did not hesitate to gra::it an ex}.Xlrte proof proceeding which the applicants counsel so requested. If I may now come back to the application before me. Primarily and I .think I will stand to be correci;ed upon stating_ that,_ I tl~ink the applicati~.n preferred by ~ounsel f.!aelem ~terns from the_ ruling metted and delivered by.this court on the 6th.day of November, 1998, before Hon. l"'iadaJ!l ~ustice Kileo • .. I care folly and almost h:?iice reDd over a~d ovef 'be'tween the time to re-assure 'myself that I ha·ve ridt· skipped a ·word :or pllr~se. I have not come 'up witli ahy :ordei fx-om the ju:cfge granting costs,. much as it abundantly ,clear t~t .' . s4e . ·-did'. quas!J. all _orders ' , . . ~ me.de by.. the .., lower . ccurt , ~ : \,, " and it_s ent~re proce~dings, but :went sile2;t as regard~ t~>cost~. For this reaso? alone I, simply finq,th~t this preseni; application for •• 4 ' ' . • • , • ~ • ' • • • ' .. • bill qf co 9~~ fq,r taxation .qa;s, been pr.e emp~ed aI¥i hence misconceived. I. eq~°i:ii d~sia't from indul~~ ~nt)(a:~s~ss,~ng . i . ~ _it ~z:i:t~ on demerits. ,, ' . ' ' . . .. ' ; • . ' :.. - ,; /:., • • • I so. . :.order. - ~. ; "[!'oScK. -~utungi' .__ DISTRICT i1EGISTRAR :- 25/_6/2001 3 Court~ ~...,~~ Ruling mcrted read this 25/6/2001 in court in the absence of IJ8rties. Each party i.s cnti tled to copy of this ruling upon payment of tJ:10 requ.site fees, read before :F'o$.K. Mutungi 1 District Hegistrar. DISrl'IdCT 1IBGLS'l1:i.AR 17/8/2001 ... .- .... .. -