tanzania investment bank vs ms ilabila industries 3 others 2010 tzhccomd 8 24 december 2010

tanzania investment bank vs ms ilabila industries 3 others 2010 tzhccomd 8 24 december 2010

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the application for delivery of possession while a cross-appeal relating to the same subject matter is pending before the Court of Appeal and has not been expressly disposed of by an order of the Court of Appeal, regardless of the absence of a stay of execution order or the Applicant's third party status.

Citation
tanzania investment bank vs ms ilabila industries 3 others 2010 tzhccomd 8 24 december 2010
Parties
Plaintiff/decree Holder: Tanzania Investment Bank; Defendant/judgment Debtor: M/S I Labi La Industries; Defendant/judgment Debtor: John Momose Cheyo; Defendant/judgment Debtor: Ngula Vitalis Cheyo; Applicant: Victoria Real Estate Developers Ltd
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection to Application for Order of Delivery of Possession
Outcome
Preliminary objection upheld; application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Execution of Decrees, Cross Appeal, Stay of Execution, Third Party Rights
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Jurisdiction Execution of Decrees Cross Appeal Stay of Execution Third Party Rights

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tanzania Investment Bank

Plaintiff/decree Holder

M/S I Labi La Industries

Defendant/judgment Debtor

John Momose Cheyo

Defendant/judgment Debtor

Ngula Vitalis Cheyo

Defendant/judgment Debtor

Victoria Real Estate Developers Ltd

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection to Application for Order of Delivery of Possession

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain an application for delivery of possession when a cross-appeal is pending before the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the filing of a notice to withdraw a cross-appeal automatically brings the cross-appeal to an end
  3. 3 Whether the existence of a cross-appeal operates as a stay of execution in the absence of a specific order

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the application for delivery of possession while a cross-appeal relating to the same subject matter is pending before the Court of Appeal and has not been expressly disposed of by an order of the Court of Appeal, regardless of the absence of a stay of execution order or the Applicant's third party status.

Court Disposition

Preliminary objection upheld; application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Each party to bear its own costs.