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 applicant failed to account for the five-month delay after the previous application was struck out, and thus did not demonstrate good cause for extension of time.
Source excerpt
The application was dismissed because the applicant failed to file written submissions as ordered, amounting to failure to prosecute.
Source excerpt
The High Court granted Shazaf Security Limited seven days to file a notice to seek revision and the intended revision after a prior filing was struck out for a procedural defect.
The High Court dismissed a labour revision application for want of prosecution after the applicant repeatedly failed to appear before the court.
The Labour Division dismissed an application to extend time for filing revision, finding the applicant failed to account for over 60 days of delay and proved no technical filing error.
The delay was technical, not actual, as the applicant filed previous applications within time but they were withdrawn or struck out for procedural reasons. The applicant accounted for the delay and acted promptly. Technical delay is a recognized ground for extension of time. The application is allowed and the applicant is granted seven days to file the intended revision.
Source excerpt
The applicant's delay was technical, resulting from the striking out of the initial revision application, and he acted promptly thereafter. Technical delay is a recognized ground for extension of time, and the applicant provided sufficient cause for the court to exercise its discretion in his favor.
Source excerpt
The delay was technical, not actual, as the initial revision was filed within time and struck out for procedural defect; the applicant accounted for the 16 days spent preparing the new application, and technical delay is recognized as sufficient cause for extension of time.
Source excerpt
The application was filed outside the prescribed 42-day limitation period without an order for extension of time; therefore, it is time barred and must be dismissed.
Source excerpt
Applicants failed to substantiate their claims of delay caused by their representative, did not account for each day of delay, and did not provide evidence of illegality apparent on the face of the record. Being laypersons is not a sufficient ground for extension. Application dismissed for lack of merit.
Source excerpt
Explore more
