wilson fathamel lyimo vs george redson lyimo others 2014 tzhc 2251 1 september 2014

wilson fathamel lyimo vs george redson lyimo others 2014 tzhc 2251 1 september 2014

The suit is not res judicata because the previous case was settled by compromise and not by a court decision; however, the compromise remains valid and binding until set aside by a competent court. The question of ownership was settled in the prior case, so the current suit is struck out.

Citation
wilson fathamel lyimo vs george redson lyimo others 2014 tzhc 2251 1 september 2014
Parties
Plaintiff: Wilson Fathamel Lyimo; 1st Defendant: George Redson Lyimo; 2nd Defendant: Prosper Paul Massawe; 3rd Defendant: Abraham Redson Lyimo; 4th Defendant: Tedson Redson Lyimo
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
Suit struck out
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Compromise Decree, Ownership of Land, Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Res Judicata Compromise Decree Ownership of Land Jurisdiction

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wilson Fathamel Lyimo

Plaintiff

George Redson Lyimo

1st Defendant

Prosper Paul Massawe

2nd Defendant

Abraham Redson Lyimo

3rd Defendant

Tedson Redson Lyimo

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Land Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the suit is res judicata due to prior compromise decree in Land Case No. 34 of 2010
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff can seek declaration of ownership after compromise decree

Ratio Decidendi

The suit is not res judicata because the previous case was settled by compromise and not by a court decision; however, the compromise remains valid and binding until set aside by a competent court. The question of ownership was settled in the prior case, so the current suit is struck out.

Court Disposition

Suit struck out

Orders

  • Suit struck out as the question of ownership was settled in Land Case No. 34 of 2010 by compromise.
  • Restraint order against defendants vacated.