Four firms ask Court of Appeal to review own decision
In its decision, the appellate court rejected an application for revision lodged by Mic Tanzania Limited, trading as Tigo, and other applicants, Millcom (Tanzania) N.V. Millcom International Cellular S.A and Shai Holdings S.A. to challenge the refusal by Judge Mruma to hear the dispute.
The court had ruled in favour of Golden Globe International Services Limited after upholding a ground of objection that the decision by Justice Mruma to refuse disqualifying himself from determining the dispute was interlocutory, as could not dispose the main case,now pending before the High Court.
However, in the hearing session before Justices Mussa Kipenka, Stella Mugasha and Rehema Mkuye last Friday, advocates for the applicants maintained that the holding by the court was an error, apparently on face of record, occasioning miscarriage of justice to their clients.
In their joint submissions, Advocates Wilbard Kapinga, Mbwambo and Gaudiousis Ishengoma told the panel that the decision by the High Court on refusal by the judge to recuse was final and conclusive and such ruling had nothing to do with subsequent process of hearing the pending petition on merits.
They submitted that the holding of the appellate court in endorsing the decision of the High Court judge was prejudicial upon their clients because they would be forced to appear before him while doubting his impartiality after having lost confidence on him.
“The court, therefore, made an error when treated the High Court decision as interlocutory and, therefore, not subject for revision. We invite this court to review its decision in order to correct this error,” the leading Counsel, Dr Kapinga, forcefully submitted.
In their response, however, Advocates for Golden Globe International Services Limited, the respondent in the matter, vehemently resisted to the submissions by counsel for the applicants and requested the court to find the application lacking merits and dismiss the same with costs.
Advocates Joseph Ndazi and Seni Malimi, told the panel that the decision of the appellate court, the subject for review, was a correct decision and the court rightly found that the ruling by the High Court judge to refuse from disqualifying himself from conducting the dispute was indeed interlocutory.
Such decision, they maintained, was not capable of finally determining the main case currently pending before the High Court.
Therefore, the advocates submitted, the Court of Appeal never erred in its decision. “We request this Court not to disturb its earlier decision,” Advocate Ndazi submitted. After hearing the submissions from both parties, the justices said they would give their ruling on the matter at a date to be announced later.
Before the High Court’s Commercial Division, the respondent instituted a petition against the applicants, seeking, among others, that the company should be allowed to run affairs of Tigo Company on claims of being the majority shareholders.
The petition was assigned to Judge Mruma. But before commencement of the hearing, a Principal Officer with Tigo Company, Mr Tumaini Sekwa, posted an affidavit on behalf of all other applicants, expressing that they have lost confidence on the judge to hear the matter and should recuse himself.
In response, the presiding judge invited counsel from either side to address him on the complaint and, having heard them, he delivered a lengthy ruling through which he declined the invitation to disqualify himself from the conduct of the matter.
The applicants decided to move to the Court of Appeal.
Comments
Post a Comment