John Lume vs. Arusha Gymkhana Club; Revision No. 94 of 2013: High Court of Tanzania (Labour Division) at Arusha (Unreported).
- Labour Law
- Applications – Applications for revision in the Labour Court – What are the relevant provisions?
- Applications – incomplete /improper citation-Effect
Held:-
(i) The relevant provisions to properly move to court to revise awards of the CMA are Section 91(1) and (2)(a) or 2(b) or 2(c) which specifies whether revision sought on ground of 91(2)(a) “....... Misconduct on the part of the arbitrator” or that 2(b) “.... the award was improperly procured” or that 2(c) “........ the award was illogical or irrational. The said provisions are to be read together with relevant sub-rules of Rule 24 and 28(1)(a) to (e) of the Labour Court Rules. Rule 28(a)(e) amplifies on grounds for which an award may be faulted on basis of section 91 (2)(a),(b) or (c).
(ii) It is a trite principle of law and practice observed by both the superior Court and the Labour Court that incomplete/improper citation of enabling provisions of the law makes an application incompetent. And that; the only remedy for an incompetent application is to have the same struck off the register.