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 of Appeal dismissed an application to strike out a notice of appeal, holding that the respondent had taken essential steps by requesting and following up on the appeal documents.
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed an application to strike out a notice of appeal, finding the respondent had taken sufficient steps toward the intended appeal.
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed an application to strike out a notice of appeal, holding that the respondents had acted diligently despite later delay by the Registrar.
The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to strike out a notice of appeal, holding the respondents were delayed by incomplete court records, not their own default.
Failure to seek and obtain leave to appeal to the Court constitutes failure to take an essential step in the appeal, warranting striking out the notice of appeal under Rule 89(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
Source excerpt
The respondent requested all necessary documents for appeal, including interlocutory proceedings, within the prescribed time. The failure to supply all requested documents by the Deputy Registrar stalled the appeal process. The respondent's actions constituted taking essential steps in pursuing the intended appeal. The application to strike out the notice of appeal lacks merit.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal struck out a notice of appeal because it was not served on the applicant or her advocate in the relevant High Court proceedings.
The application to strike out the notice of appeal was prematurely filed because there was a pending reference challenging the extension of time to file the notice of appeal, and its outcome would directly affect the present application. Proceeding with the application would amount to an abuse of court process.
Source excerpt
The respondents' cumulative acts—referencing the wrong case number, lodging the notice of appeal in the wrong registry, and addressing the request for documents to the wrong registrar—demonstrate a lack of diligence and essential steps towards instituting the intended appeal, justifying striking out the notice of appeal.
Source excerpt
The respondents' cumulative procedural errors—referencing the wrong case number, lodging in the wrong registry, and addressing the wrong registrar—demonstrate a lack of diligence and intention to prosecute the appeal, thus failing to take essential steps as required by the Rules. The notice of appeal is therefore struck out.
Source excerpt
Explore more
