CATS NET LIMITED VS. TANZANIA COMMUNICATION REGULATORY AUTHORITY CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 526/01 OF 2020

Abstract

(i) The assertion on Mr. Cosatta's sickness becomes insignificant because even if it is true that he was sick to the extent of not being able to enter appearance, still he was supposed to so inform the Court before or at the time the application was called on for hearing. Since no such information was relayed to the Court then no sufficient cause has been established to warrant re-hearing of the application in terms of rule 63 (3) of the Rules. (ii) As it is claimed by the applicant, then affidavits of the said court staff were necessary to supplement and support the assertion that he really came to Court. Short of that, his assertion is far from being believed and relied upon. (iii) The argument by Mr. Cosatta that we should allow the application and let the application be re-heard because there exists an important legal issue on the retrospectivity operation of procedural laws in the decision she intends to challenge if the notice of appeal is retained, should not detain us at all. As rightly argued by Mr. Sanga, the argument is irrelevant and out of context. The same does not constitute sufficient cause in terms of rule 63 (3) of the Rules and besides such an argument did not fare in the Court's decision in Civil Application No. 342/01 of 2018.