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 court found that the applicant's evidence of concealment or transfer of company property by directors was uncontested, and that both 1st and 2nd respondents are directors of the 3rd respondent. In light of untraceable assets and admitted directorship, the court held it justifiable to lift the corporate veil and hold the directors personally liable for satisfaction of the labour award.
Source excerpt
Interim injunction was refused due to applicant's failure to estimate property value and specify care for assets, making injunction detrimental to respondent; however, security deposit was ordered as closure of respondent's business would likely render any CMA award unenforceable, causing irreparable loss to applicant.
Source excerpt
The CMA became functus officio after the settlement agreement (CMA F6) was signed, and had no jurisdiction to entertain further applications or calculate compensation. The applicant failed to provide evidence of the respondent's refusal to reinstate, and there was no proper application before the CMA. Therefore, the proceedings and resulting award were a nullity.
Source excerpt
The Deputy Registrar erred in law by ordering recalculation of the award after it had already been determined by a predecessor executing officer; he was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to revisit the calculation. Change of name of the decree debtor does not affect liability under the decree. Execution must proceed to enforce the award.
Source excerpt
The respondent's alleged application to set aside the exparte award at CMA does not justify stay of execution, especially since it was not served to the applicant and no application for stay was filed before the court. The directors must be summoned to show cause why they should not be committed to prison for non-compliance with the CMA award.
Source excerpt
The High Court (Civil Division) lacks jurisdiction over labour matters, including claims for unpaid salaries based on a CMA award. The proper procedure is to file for execution before the High Court Labour Division.
Source excerpt
The CMA lacked jurisdiction to entertain the dispute as the claims for salary arrears from 1997 to 2009 were filed out of time without condonation, the CMA F1 was defective for want of proper mandate, the arbitrator exceeded jurisdiction by awarding PPF contributions and amounts under execution elsewhere, and the procedure adopted for admitting evidence was improper, vitiating the proceedings.
Source excerpt
The High Court struck out UAP Insurance’s revision application as incompetent because it challenged an execution application filed by the respondents, not by the applicant.
The court dismissed an application to extend time to seek interpretation of a labour judgment and CMA award, finding no sufficient cause for the delay.
Res judicata does not apply where prior execution applications were struck out or withdrawn without determination on merit; the Deputy Registrar's decision was made without hearing the applicant, and justice requires the matter be heard on merit.
Source excerpt
Explore more
