Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The arbitrator erred by proceeding ex-parte and dismissing the application to set aside the award without properly considering the applicant's justifiable absence and relying on evidence not adduced by the parties. The applicant's notification and supporting documents constituted sufficient cause for adjournment.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to account for the delay of over a year and two months and did not demonstrate sufficient cause for extension. The alleged illegality was not apparent on the face of the record and did not meet the threshold for granting extension of time. Therefore, the application lacked merit and was dismissed.
Source excerpt
The arbitrator erred by proceeding ex-parte and dismissing the application to set aside the award without properly considering the applicant's notice of absence and supporting evidence. The arbitrator relied on evidence not adduced by the parties, violating procedural fairness. The ex-parte award is set aside and the matter remitted for hearing before a different arbitrator.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed an application to extend time for filing a stay of execution, finding no sufficient cause for the delay.
The High Court dismissed a revision application challenging an ex-parte labour award, finding proper service, no proven cheating, and no basis to disturb the award.
The High Court revised a CMA ruling and extended time to seek setting aside of an ex parte award, holding the immunity issue deserved consideration.
The High Court dismissed a labour revision challenge to a CMA ruling, holding the applicant failed to explain the delay and relied on false and unsupported affidavits.
The High Court granted an extension of time to seek revision of a CMA ruling, accepting alleged illegality based on diplomatic immunity as enough to justify the delay.
The High Court set aside a CMA ex parte award after finding the applicant had a sufficient reason for non-appearance and deserved a hearing inter partes.
The applicant's revision application is properly filed before the court, which has jurisdiction to entertain it following an ex-parte award in arbitration. The preliminary objection lacks merit and is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
