Zakaria Maseke
Member
- Apr 26, 2022
- 64
- 100
Kuna kesi nyingi zinazohusu hii mada.
Tuanze na kesi ya PHILIPO JOSEPH LUKONDE Vs FARAJI ALLY SAIDI, LAND REFERENCE NO. 01 OF 2020.
Uchambuzi wa hizi kesi unaletwa kwako nami Zakaria Maseke - Advocate Candidate (0754575246 -WhatsApp)
Kwenye hii kesi Mr. PHILIPO alikubali kumuuzia FARAJI kipande cha ardhi kwa Tshs. 165,000,000/=.
FARAJI akalipa kianzio Tshs. 134,200,000/=, hiyo nyingine iliyobaki wakakubaliana kwamba italipwa baada ya mwenye kiwanja (PHILIPO) kumkabidhi mnunuaji hati ya umiliki (Certificate of Title).
Baadaye muuzaji, (Philipo) akagoma kuuza tena kiwanja. Mnunuaji akaenda Mahakamani kudai kiwanja. Mahakama ikamwambia muuzaji apokee kiasi kilichobaki ili kiwanja kihamie kwa mnunuaji (for the title to pass).
Philipo, Muuza kiwanja hakuridhika, akakata rufaa kwenye Mahakama ya Rufaa, akashindwa kesi akaambiwa tena apokee hela iliyobaki ili kiwanja kihamie kwa mnunuzi.
Mnunuzi akaomba kukazia Hukumu. Shauri la kukazia hukumu likapangwa kusikilizwa kwa naibu msajili (Deputy Registrar)
Deputy registrar akatoa maamuzi ya kukazia hukumu, akamuagiza mnunuzi amalizie kiasi kilichobaki na yule muuzaji asaini nyaraka za kuuza kiwanja ili kutekeleza tuzo ya Mahakama.
ASSUME WEWE NDO MUUZAJI UKO AGGRIEVED AT THIS STAGE, WHAT'S THE REMEDY?
Kama muuzaji anataka kupinga huo uamuzi wa msajili, remedy au utaratibu ni upi? Wengine wanasema una challenge by way of reference pale pale Mahakama Kuu kwa jaji.
Wengine wanasema registrar anapokaa kusikiliza maombi ya kukazia hukumu (execution) anasimama kama Mahakama Kuu (is deemed to be the High Court) kwa hiyo maamuzi yake huwezi kuyapinga kwa kumpandisha kwa jaji wa Mahakama Kuu, kama tulivyozoea kwenye ile reference nyingine ya masuala ya taxation au bill of cost. Which is which?
Turudi nyuma, kwenye hii kesi, muuzaji baada ya kushindwa kwenye Mahakama ya Rufaa, alitaka kuomba review (marejeo) ili Mahakama ya Rufaa ipitie upya uamuzi wake, anadai kwamba mke wake hakuwa ameridhia wauze kiwanja, lakini akakuta ameshachelewa boti (yuko nje ya muda), akaomba kwanza kuongezewa muda aweze kuomba review nje ya muda (extension of time to file review).
Akamuomba msajili (Deputy Registrar) asimamishe kukazia hukumu, kila kitu kitulie hivyo hivyo (maintenance of status quo) hadi kesi ya review iishe kule Mahakama ya Rufaa. Deputy Registrar (msajili) akakataa akaendelea na kukazia hukumu akasema kiwanja kiuzwe kwa mnunuzi husika.
Swali ni lile lile, ukiwa aggrieved na maamuzi ya msajili unafanyaje?
Kwenye hii kesi, mlalamikaji alifungua kesi Mahakama Kuu kuomba REFERENCE ili Mahakama Kuu ipitie tena (i-review) mwenendo wa kesi na uamuzi uliofanywa na Msajili. Akapigwa P.O (akawekewa pingamizi) kwamba Mahakama haina mamlaka ya kusikiliza alichoomba.
Baada ya kusoma sheria ya mwenendo wa kesi za madai (Civil Procedure Code) Order XL rule 1 na section 77 Mahakama Kuu ikasema, Msajili akiwa anaamua shauri la kukazia hukumu anasimama kama Jaji na uamuzi wake unasimama kama uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu, kwa hiyo huwezi kupinga maamuzi ya msajili kwa kuomba reference mbele ya Jaji pale pale Mahakama Kuu. Pingamizi likapita, Mahakama ikasema haina mamlaka, application ikawa dismissed.
Kesi nyingine ni THE TREASUREY REGISTRAR AND TWO OTHERS Vs HADRIAN BENEDICT CHIPETA, REFERENCE NO. 25 OF 2022, ambapo Mahakama Kuu ilikataa na ku dismiss maombi ya reference dhidi ya maamuzi ya Msajili. Jaji akasema kwamba, “I am of the firm view that the decision of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court being a decision made in execution of a decree by a Court which passed the same, is a decision of this Court.”
“It is my respectful view that the decision of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court is deemed to be the decision of the High Court, therefore, the same is challenged by way of appeal, reference and or revision to the Court of Appealof Tanzania.”
Kwenye kesi ya ALPHONCE MAZIKU MASELE (Administrator of the estate of Lucy Madembwe Masele) Vs ACCESS BANK TANZANIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER, LAND REFERENCE No. 02 OF 2022, Mahakama Kuu ilikataa tena maombi ya Reference, ambapo Jaji alisema:-
“...an Order or decision delivered by the Deputy Registrar cannot be considered as a decision of the lower court for it to be challenged by way of Reference or Review to this court. The only way in which this court can review a decision of Deputy Registrar is by way of Reference as it is provided under Rule 7(1) of the Advocates Remuneration Orders, 2015.”
Kesi nyingine ni NURDIN MOHAMED CHINGO Vs SALUM SAID MTIWE AND ANOTHER, CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 6 OF 2022. Kwenye hii kesi, the issue was whether the High Court has mandate to determine application for reference or revision against the Deputy Registrar? Jaji akasema, Hapana:
“...the decision made by the Deputy Registrar of the High Court is deemed to be the decision of the High Court. It is therefore, challenged way of an appeal, reference and/or revision to the Court of Appeal. Another recourse against such decision is to file an application for review to the High Court which made the impugned decree.” “...Reference from the decision of the Deputy Registrar can only arise from the decision made by the Deputy Registrar as taxing officer under Rule 7 (1) of the Advocates Remuneration Orders, 2015.”
Kwenye kesi ya NATHANIEL MWAKIPITI KIGWILA Vs MARGARETH ANDULILE BUKUKU, MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 586 OF 2022, Jaji alikataa maombi ya reference akasema kwamba:-
“...it is apparent that the application for reference before this Court triggered by the decision and order made by the Deputy Registrar is not proper. Unlike in Bill Costs (Taxation matters), where the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015 explicitly and clearly provides for a reference to the High Court from the decision of the Deputy Registrar as a Taxing officer, the Civil Procedure Code does not apply in a way the applicant has applied for a reference against the decision of the Deputy Registrar in execution proceedings.”
“...a reference from the decision of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court cannot lie to this Court. That decision may be challenged only by way of an appeal to the court of appeal as per section 5 (1) (b) (ix) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Revision to the Court of Appeal. Also, that decision can be challenged by way of review in the same executing court.”
Soma pia kesi ya _Sogea Satom Company vs. Barclays Bank Tanzania and Others, Civil Reference No. 15 of 2021(HC) unreported. (Ziko nyingi but, just to mention a few).
KESI AMBAZO REFERENCE ILIKUBALIWA:
Lakini zipo kesi ambazo watu wali challenge maamuzi ya Registrar kupitia reference kwa Jaji pale pale Mahakama Kuu, na wakakubaliwa. Mfano kesi ya NCL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs ALLIANCE FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 6 OF 2021 (HC). Kwenye hii kesi applicant aliomba reference Mahakama Kuu akipinga uamuzi wa Msajili kwenye kesi ya kukazia hukumu. Na Mahakama Kuu ikakubali maombi yake.
Kesi nyingine ni NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION OF TANZANIA LIMITED Vs. STEVEN ZAKARIA KITEU AND TWO OTHERS, CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 07 OF 2020 (HC), ambapo applicant aliomba reference seeking an order to quash and set aside the decision of the Deputy Registrar na akafanikiwa.
Soma pia kesi ya Mustafa Mbinga v. Tourism Promotion Services (T) Limited, Reference No. 3 of 2020, (HC Labour Division).
UCHAMBUZI WA JAJI MLYAMBINA:
Mkanganyiko huu umechambuliwa kwa kina na Jaji Mlyambina kwenye kesi ya YAKOBO JOHN MASANJA Vs MIC TANZANIA LIMITED, LABOUR REVISION APPLICATION NO. 385 OF 2022.
Kwenye hii Kesi, Mheshimiwa Jaji Mlyambina amechambua kwa kina, kuhusu issue ya whether Mahakama Kuu ina mamlaka ya kupitia upya maamuzi ya Msajili wa Mahakama Kuu? “(whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain Revision Proceedings against the Ruling or Order of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar.)”
Jaji Mlyambina anaanza kwa kusema kwamba, kwa mujibu wa sheria wasajili ni sehemu ya Mahakama Kuu na mamlaka yao yapo Order XLIII ya CPC. Kwa hiyo, hata maamuzi yao (Registrars) yana hadhi sawa (same status) na maamuzi ya Mahakama Kuu. Hata hivyo anasema, mamlaka hayo hayawafanyi Registrars (wasajili) nao wawe Majaji wa Mahakama Kuu.
Sasa swali linabaki, ni njia gani sahihi ya kupinga (ku challenge) maamuzi ya msajili?
Jaji Mlyambina anasema, kuna mitazamo tofauti si chini ya nane (8 schools of thought). Akaanza kuchambua maamuzi tofauti tofauti ya Mahakama Kuu, jinsi Majaji wanavyokinzana.
1: Akaanza na Majaji ambao wanasema kwamba, ukiwa aggrieved na maamuzi ya Registrar, the remedy is to appeal to the Court of Appeal of Tanzania. (Unatakiwa kukata rufaa kwenye Mahakama ya Rufaa)
2: Mtazamo wa pili, ni wa Majaji wanaosema the decision of the Deputy Registrar is subject of Review.
3: Mtazamo wa tatu ni Revision. Majaji wanasema Mahakama Kuu ina mamlaka ya ku revise maamuzi ya Deputy Registrar yaliyofanyika kwenye execution.
4: Mtazamo wa nne ni wa Majaji ambao wanapinga Revision. Wanasema kwamba, uamuzi wa Deputy Registrar hauwezi kuwa revised na Jaji wa Mahakama Kuu. Wanasema uamuzi wa Msajili ni uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu, hivyo Mahakama Kuu haiwezi kukaa kupitia upya na kutengua uamuzi wake yenyewe (the decision of the Deputy Registrar is the decision of the High Court and therefore, the High Court cannot revise its own decision).
5: Mtazamo wa tano ni wa Majaji ambao wanasema kwamba mwenye mamlaka ya kufanyia Revision uamuzi wa Msajili ni Mahakama ya Rufani pekee na sio Mahakama Kuu. “Revisional powers over the decision of the Deputy Registrar is by the Court of Appeal of Tanzania.”
6: Mtazamo wa sita ni wa Majaji ambao wanasema ukiwa aggrieved na uamuzi wa Msajili, remedy ni kuomba reference kwa Jaji pale pale Mahakama Kuu. (Whoever is aggrieved with the decision of the Deputy Registrar has to file REFERENCE before the Judge).
7: Mtazamo wa saba, ni Majaji wanaopinga reference, kwamba uamuzi wa Msajili hauwezi kuwa challenged kwa kuomba reference kwa Jaji.
8: Mtazamo wa nane ni wa Majaji ambao wanasema uamuzi wa Msajili unachukuliwa kama uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu. Kwa hiyo uamuzi huo unaweza kuwa challenged kupitia appeal, reference au revision to the Court of Appeal.
Baada ya uchambuzi huo, swali bado linabakia je, ni njia gani sahihi ya kupinga (ku challenge) maamuzi ya Msajili?
Kwa mujibu wa hii kesi, Jaji Mlyambina ameshauri tutumie REVIEW. Anasema, “It is my humble view that this Court should welcome the review remedy of the Deputy Registrars decision”
“...considering the peculiarities and uniqueness of the LABOUR LAWS, Deputy Registrar has no general power to change the substance of an award such as changing from the order of reinstatement to compensation and make quantification rather. Indeed, the decision of the Deputy Registrar on labour matters is SUBJECT OF REVIEW BEFORE THE LABOUR JUDGE.” Rule 26 of the Labour Court Rules
Sasa Angalizo, huu uamuzi ni kwa mujibu wa sheria za kazi (labour laws), hii ni kesi ya labour na hata sheria na kesi nyingi alizotumia Jaji Mlyambina ni za labour, lakini kuna zingine ametumia sio za labour na pia ametumia hadi CPC. Hii ni kwa sababu Wasajili wa Mahakama Kuu ya labour pia wana mamlaka kama yale yale walio nayo wasajili wengine kwenye CPC.
Swali ni je, hii review anayosema, inatumika ku challenge hata maamuzi ya Msajili kwenye kesi ambazo sio za labour? Maana review kwenye CPC inafanywa na mwamuzi yule yule, ila hii review ya labour anayosema Jaji Mlyambina, haifanywi na msajili yule yule alotoa uamuzi ila inafanywa na Jaji.
Namnukuu, (speaking of labour laws, anasema) “Judges have been vested with powers to review the decisions of the Deputy Registrar which is not normal in ordinary suit where the reviewing body is the same person formerly made such decision.”
Swali hilo linajibiwa kwenye page ya 39 ya judgement yake, ambapo amesema, “If this Court is to prefer reference remedy as a remedy done against the decisions of the Deputy Registrars in Sub Registries of the High Court and other Divisions of the High Court in execution or Bill of Costs matters WHICH ARE NOT LABOUR BASED, that is to adopt too dogmatic approach to what should in my opinion BE LIMITED IN NORMAL CASES BUT NOT IN HYBRID LABOUR LAW SYSTEM.”
Hukumu hii ni ya tarehe 28/02/2023
Sasa jibu lipi ni sahihi? Hapo endelea kusoma kesi mwenyewe! (Au tafuta Mawakili Wasomi kwa msaada).
-----MWISHO----
Angalizo: Uchambuzi huu ni kwa mujibu wa sheria na kesi zilizokuwa zinatumika mpaka siku ya kupost hili andiko. Hivyo unaposoma leo haya maelezo, soma sheria na kesi zilizopo sasa hivi, ili ujue kama kuna position mpya! Sheria zinarekebishwa na kesi mpya zinatoka kila siku.
Pia natoa angalizo, wale wazee wa kukopi machapisho ya watu na kuweka majina yenu. Ni kosa kisheria. Hatua kali zitachukuliwa kwa yeyote atakayejimilikisha andiko hili. Unaruhusiwa tu kusambaza lakini usibadili yaliyomo. Ni heri uanze kuandika ya kwako mpya.
Disclaimer: Lengo la hii makala ni kutoa elimu kwa jamii. Huu sio ushauri wa kisheria kwa mtu yeyote. Ikiwa utaamua kufungua kesi kwa kufata haya maelezo na ukapata hasara, mwandishi wa maelezo haya hatawajibika kwa vyovyote vile. Kama unahitaji ushauri wa kisheria wasiliana na Mawakili.
Imeandaliwa na kuletwa kwako nami,
Zakaria Maseke,
Advocate Candidate,
(0754575246 - WhatsApp).
zakariamaseke@gmail.com.
Tuanze na kesi ya PHILIPO JOSEPH LUKONDE Vs FARAJI ALLY SAIDI, LAND REFERENCE NO. 01 OF 2020.
Uchambuzi wa hizi kesi unaletwa kwako nami Zakaria Maseke - Advocate Candidate (0754575246 -WhatsApp)
Kwenye hii kesi Mr. PHILIPO alikubali kumuuzia FARAJI kipande cha ardhi kwa Tshs. 165,000,000/=.
FARAJI akalipa kianzio Tshs. 134,200,000/=, hiyo nyingine iliyobaki wakakubaliana kwamba italipwa baada ya mwenye kiwanja (PHILIPO) kumkabidhi mnunuaji hati ya umiliki (Certificate of Title).
Baadaye muuzaji, (Philipo) akagoma kuuza tena kiwanja. Mnunuaji akaenda Mahakamani kudai kiwanja. Mahakama ikamwambia muuzaji apokee kiasi kilichobaki ili kiwanja kihamie kwa mnunuaji (for the title to pass).
Philipo, Muuza kiwanja hakuridhika, akakata rufaa kwenye Mahakama ya Rufaa, akashindwa kesi akaambiwa tena apokee hela iliyobaki ili kiwanja kihamie kwa mnunuzi.
Mnunuzi akaomba kukazia Hukumu. Shauri la kukazia hukumu likapangwa kusikilizwa kwa naibu msajili (Deputy Registrar)
Deputy registrar akatoa maamuzi ya kukazia hukumu, akamuagiza mnunuzi amalizie kiasi kilichobaki na yule muuzaji asaini nyaraka za kuuza kiwanja ili kutekeleza tuzo ya Mahakama.
ASSUME WEWE NDO MUUZAJI UKO AGGRIEVED AT THIS STAGE, WHAT'S THE REMEDY?
Kama muuzaji anataka kupinga huo uamuzi wa msajili, remedy au utaratibu ni upi? Wengine wanasema una challenge by way of reference pale pale Mahakama Kuu kwa jaji.
Wengine wanasema registrar anapokaa kusikiliza maombi ya kukazia hukumu (execution) anasimama kama Mahakama Kuu (is deemed to be the High Court) kwa hiyo maamuzi yake huwezi kuyapinga kwa kumpandisha kwa jaji wa Mahakama Kuu, kama tulivyozoea kwenye ile reference nyingine ya masuala ya taxation au bill of cost. Which is which?
Turudi nyuma, kwenye hii kesi, muuzaji baada ya kushindwa kwenye Mahakama ya Rufaa, alitaka kuomba review (marejeo) ili Mahakama ya Rufaa ipitie upya uamuzi wake, anadai kwamba mke wake hakuwa ameridhia wauze kiwanja, lakini akakuta ameshachelewa boti (yuko nje ya muda), akaomba kwanza kuongezewa muda aweze kuomba review nje ya muda (extension of time to file review).
Akamuomba msajili (Deputy Registrar) asimamishe kukazia hukumu, kila kitu kitulie hivyo hivyo (maintenance of status quo) hadi kesi ya review iishe kule Mahakama ya Rufaa. Deputy Registrar (msajili) akakataa akaendelea na kukazia hukumu akasema kiwanja kiuzwe kwa mnunuzi husika.
Swali ni lile lile, ukiwa aggrieved na maamuzi ya msajili unafanyaje?
Kwenye hii kesi, mlalamikaji alifungua kesi Mahakama Kuu kuomba REFERENCE ili Mahakama Kuu ipitie tena (i-review) mwenendo wa kesi na uamuzi uliofanywa na Msajili. Akapigwa P.O (akawekewa pingamizi) kwamba Mahakama haina mamlaka ya kusikiliza alichoomba.
Baada ya kusoma sheria ya mwenendo wa kesi za madai (Civil Procedure Code) Order XL rule 1 na section 77 Mahakama Kuu ikasema, Msajili akiwa anaamua shauri la kukazia hukumu anasimama kama Jaji na uamuzi wake unasimama kama uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu, kwa hiyo huwezi kupinga maamuzi ya msajili kwa kuomba reference mbele ya Jaji pale pale Mahakama Kuu. Pingamizi likapita, Mahakama ikasema haina mamlaka, application ikawa dismissed.
Kesi nyingine ni THE TREASUREY REGISTRAR AND TWO OTHERS Vs HADRIAN BENEDICT CHIPETA, REFERENCE NO. 25 OF 2022, ambapo Mahakama Kuu ilikataa na ku dismiss maombi ya reference dhidi ya maamuzi ya Msajili. Jaji akasema kwamba, “I am of the firm view that the decision of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court being a decision made in execution of a decree by a Court which passed the same, is a decision of this Court.”
“It is my respectful view that the decision of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court is deemed to be the decision of the High Court, therefore, the same is challenged by way of appeal, reference and or revision to the Court of Appealof Tanzania.”
Kwenye kesi ya ALPHONCE MAZIKU MASELE (Administrator of the estate of Lucy Madembwe Masele) Vs ACCESS BANK TANZANIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER, LAND REFERENCE No. 02 OF 2022, Mahakama Kuu ilikataa tena maombi ya Reference, ambapo Jaji alisema:-
“...an Order or decision delivered by the Deputy Registrar cannot be considered as a decision of the lower court for it to be challenged by way of Reference or Review to this court. The only way in which this court can review a decision of Deputy Registrar is by way of Reference as it is provided under Rule 7(1) of the Advocates Remuneration Orders, 2015.”
Kesi nyingine ni NURDIN MOHAMED CHINGO Vs SALUM SAID MTIWE AND ANOTHER, CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 6 OF 2022. Kwenye hii kesi, the issue was whether the High Court has mandate to determine application for reference or revision against the Deputy Registrar? Jaji akasema, Hapana:
“...the decision made by the Deputy Registrar of the High Court is deemed to be the decision of the High Court. It is therefore, challenged way of an appeal, reference and/or revision to the Court of Appeal. Another recourse against such decision is to file an application for review to the High Court which made the impugned decree.” “...Reference from the decision of the Deputy Registrar can only arise from the decision made by the Deputy Registrar as taxing officer under Rule 7 (1) of the Advocates Remuneration Orders, 2015.”
Kwenye kesi ya NATHANIEL MWAKIPITI KIGWILA Vs MARGARETH ANDULILE BUKUKU, MISC. LAND APPLICATION NO. 586 OF 2022, Jaji alikataa maombi ya reference akasema kwamba:-
“...it is apparent that the application for reference before this Court triggered by the decision and order made by the Deputy Registrar is not proper. Unlike in Bill Costs (Taxation matters), where the Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015 explicitly and clearly provides for a reference to the High Court from the decision of the Deputy Registrar as a Taxing officer, the Civil Procedure Code does not apply in a way the applicant has applied for a reference against the decision of the Deputy Registrar in execution proceedings.”
“...a reference from the decision of the Deputy Registrar of the High Court cannot lie to this Court. That decision may be challenged only by way of an appeal to the court of appeal as per section 5 (1) (b) (ix) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Revision to the Court of Appeal. Also, that decision can be challenged by way of review in the same executing court.”
Soma pia kesi ya _Sogea Satom Company vs. Barclays Bank Tanzania and Others, Civil Reference No. 15 of 2021(HC) unreported. (Ziko nyingi but, just to mention a few).
KESI AMBAZO REFERENCE ILIKUBALIWA:
Lakini zipo kesi ambazo watu wali challenge maamuzi ya Registrar kupitia reference kwa Jaji pale pale Mahakama Kuu, na wakakubaliwa. Mfano kesi ya NCL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs ALLIANCE FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED, CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 6 OF 2021 (HC). Kwenye hii kesi applicant aliomba reference Mahakama Kuu akipinga uamuzi wa Msajili kwenye kesi ya kukazia hukumu. Na Mahakama Kuu ikakubali maombi yake.
Kesi nyingine ni NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION OF TANZANIA LIMITED Vs. STEVEN ZAKARIA KITEU AND TWO OTHERS, CIVIL REFERENCE NO. 07 OF 2020 (HC), ambapo applicant aliomba reference seeking an order to quash and set aside the decision of the Deputy Registrar na akafanikiwa.
Soma pia kesi ya Mustafa Mbinga v. Tourism Promotion Services (T) Limited, Reference No. 3 of 2020, (HC Labour Division).
UCHAMBUZI WA JAJI MLYAMBINA:
Mkanganyiko huu umechambuliwa kwa kina na Jaji Mlyambina kwenye kesi ya YAKOBO JOHN MASANJA Vs MIC TANZANIA LIMITED, LABOUR REVISION APPLICATION NO. 385 OF 2022.
Kwenye hii Kesi, Mheshimiwa Jaji Mlyambina amechambua kwa kina, kuhusu issue ya whether Mahakama Kuu ina mamlaka ya kupitia upya maamuzi ya Msajili wa Mahakama Kuu? “(whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain Revision Proceedings against the Ruling or Order of the Registrar or Deputy Registrar.)”
Jaji Mlyambina anaanza kwa kusema kwamba, kwa mujibu wa sheria wasajili ni sehemu ya Mahakama Kuu na mamlaka yao yapo Order XLIII ya CPC. Kwa hiyo, hata maamuzi yao (Registrars) yana hadhi sawa (same status) na maamuzi ya Mahakama Kuu. Hata hivyo anasema, mamlaka hayo hayawafanyi Registrars (wasajili) nao wawe Majaji wa Mahakama Kuu.
Sasa swali linabaki, ni njia gani sahihi ya kupinga (ku challenge) maamuzi ya msajili?
Jaji Mlyambina anasema, kuna mitazamo tofauti si chini ya nane (8 schools of thought). Akaanza kuchambua maamuzi tofauti tofauti ya Mahakama Kuu, jinsi Majaji wanavyokinzana.
1: Akaanza na Majaji ambao wanasema kwamba, ukiwa aggrieved na maamuzi ya Registrar, the remedy is to appeal to the Court of Appeal of Tanzania. (Unatakiwa kukata rufaa kwenye Mahakama ya Rufaa)
2: Mtazamo wa pili, ni wa Majaji wanaosema the decision of the Deputy Registrar is subject of Review.
3: Mtazamo wa tatu ni Revision. Majaji wanasema Mahakama Kuu ina mamlaka ya ku revise maamuzi ya Deputy Registrar yaliyofanyika kwenye execution.
4: Mtazamo wa nne ni wa Majaji ambao wanapinga Revision. Wanasema kwamba, uamuzi wa Deputy Registrar hauwezi kuwa revised na Jaji wa Mahakama Kuu. Wanasema uamuzi wa Msajili ni uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu, hivyo Mahakama Kuu haiwezi kukaa kupitia upya na kutengua uamuzi wake yenyewe (the decision of the Deputy Registrar is the decision of the High Court and therefore, the High Court cannot revise its own decision).
5: Mtazamo wa tano ni wa Majaji ambao wanasema kwamba mwenye mamlaka ya kufanyia Revision uamuzi wa Msajili ni Mahakama ya Rufani pekee na sio Mahakama Kuu. “Revisional powers over the decision of the Deputy Registrar is by the Court of Appeal of Tanzania.”
6: Mtazamo wa sita ni wa Majaji ambao wanasema ukiwa aggrieved na uamuzi wa Msajili, remedy ni kuomba reference kwa Jaji pale pale Mahakama Kuu. (Whoever is aggrieved with the decision of the Deputy Registrar has to file REFERENCE before the Judge).
7: Mtazamo wa saba, ni Majaji wanaopinga reference, kwamba uamuzi wa Msajili hauwezi kuwa challenged kwa kuomba reference kwa Jaji.
8: Mtazamo wa nane ni wa Majaji ambao wanasema uamuzi wa Msajili unachukuliwa kama uamuzi wa Mahakama Kuu. Kwa hiyo uamuzi huo unaweza kuwa challenged kupitia appeal, reference au revision to the Court of Appeal.
Baada ya uchambuzi huo, swali bado linabakia je, ni njia gani sahihi ya kupinga (ku challenge) maamuzi ya Msajili?
Kwa mujibu wa hii kesi, Jaji Mlyambina ameshauri tutumie REVIEW. Anasema, “It is my humble view that this Court should welcome the review remedy of the Deputy Registrars decision”
“...considering the peculiarities and uniqueness of the LABOUR LAWS, Deputy Registrar has no general power to change the substance of an award such as changing from the order of reinstatement to compensation and make quantification rather. Indeed, the decision of the Deputy Registrar on labour matters is SUBJECT OF REVIEW BEFORE THE LABOUR JUDGE.” Rule 26 of the Labour Court Rules
Sasa Angalizo, huu uamuzi ni kwa mujibu wa sheria za kazi (labour laws), hii ni kesi ya labour na hata sheria na kesi nyingi alizotumia Jaji Mlyambina ni za labour, lakini kuna zingine ametumia sio za labour na pia ametumia hadi CPC. Hii ni kwa sababu Wasajili wa Mahakama Kuu ya labour pia wana mamlaka kama yale yale walio nayo wasajili wengine kwenye CPC.
Swali ni je, hii review anayosema, inatumika ku challenge hata maamuzi ya Msajili kwenye kesi ambazo sio za labour? Maana review kwenye CPC inafanywa na mwamuzi yule yule, ila hii review ya labour anayosema Jaji Mlyambina, haifanywi na msajili yule yule alotoa uamuzi ila inafanywa na Jaji.
Namnukuu, (speaking of labour laws, anasema) “Judges have been vested with powers to review the decisions of the Deputy Registrar which is not normal in ordinary suit where the reviewing body is the same person formerly made such decision.”
Swali hilo linajibiwa kwenye page ya 39 ya judgement yake, ambapo amesema, “If this Court is to prefer reference remedy as a remedy done against the decisions of the Deputy Registrars in Sub Registries of the High Court and other Divisions of the High Court in execution or Bill of Costs matters WHICH ARE NOT LABOUR BASED, that is to adopt too dogmatic approach to what should in my opinion BE LIMITED IN NORMAL CASES BUT NOT IN HYBRID LABOUR LAW SYSTEM.”
Hukumu hii ni ya tarehe 28/02/2023
Sasa jibu lipi ni sahihi? Hapo endelea kusoma kesi mwenyewe! (Au tafuta Mawakili Wasomi kwa msaada).
-----MWISHO----
Angalizo: Uchambuzi huu ni kwa mujibu wa sheria na kesi zilizokuwa zinatumika mpaka siku ya kupost hili andiko. Hivyo unaposoma leo haya maelezo, soma sheria na kesi zilizopo sasa hivi, ili ujue kama kuna position mpya! Sheria zinarekebishwa na kesi mpya zinatoka kila siku.
Pia natoa angalizo, wale wazee wa kukopi machapisho ya watu na kuweka majina yenu. Ni kosa kisheria. Hatua kali zitachukuliwa kwa yeyote atakayejimilikisha andiko hili. Unaruhusiwa tu kusambaza lakini usibadili yaliyomo. Ni heri uanze kuandika ya kwako mpya.
Disclaimer: Lengo la hii makala ni kutoa elimu kwa jamii. Huu sio ushauri wa kisheria kwa mtu yeyote. Ikiwa utaamua kufungua kesi kwa kufata haya maelezo na ukapata hasara, mwandishi wa maelezo haya hatawajibika kwa vyovyote vile. Kama unahitaji ushauri wa kisheria wasiliana na Mawakili.
Imeandaliwa na kuletwa kwako nami,
Zakaria Maseke,
Advocate Candidate,
(0754575246 - WhatsApp).
zakariamaseke@gmail.com.
