JOSEPH GIDION-The Law On Granting Power of Attorney
JOSEPH GIDION-The Law On Granting Power of Attorney
JOSEPH GIDION-The Law On Granting Power of Attorney
RULING
MPAZE, J.:
On 12th June, 2024 when the matter came for hearing, the appellant
stated that he had represented the respondent at the District Land and
power of attorney granted him the power to prosecute even the appeal.
1
Mr. Maalim further added that Sections 18 and 30 of the Land
Disputes Courts Act (LDCA), Cap 216 [R.E 2019], empower any party to
the law allows such representation, then the matter should proceed with
the hearing.
Mikongo.
District Land and Housing Tribunal (DLHT). Within the file, I found a
Mchoma, and the Donee, Maalim Abeid Mikongo, on 1st February, 2023
I also examined the DLHT proceedings and noted that on 31st July,
2023 when the matter was called for a hearing, the records indicated that
both the applicant and respondent were present. The DLHT recorded;
2
present. The respondent is represented by Maaiim Abeid
with a power of attorney).'
The issue raised by the appellant centred on the legality of the
While the appellant questioned its validity, the Donee of the power of
LDCA.
attorney was legally registered and followed all the required procedures
for registration. The question, however, is whether there were any good
is to ensure that the Donor's intentions are carried out when he is unable
3
Various cases from this court and the Court of Appeal have
4
Again, in the case of Abdul Rahim Jamal Mohamedf suing
DLHT, nowhere did the Donor specify the reasons for granting this special
5
effect as if we have done, executed, or performed together
to institute, prosecute, appeal, or seek other remedies.'
Despite the Donor indicating in this power of attorney that he has
given the Donee the power to carry out these duties as specified therein,
this alone was not enough. The Donee was required, in the power of
therein and instead decided to grant the power of attorney to the Donee.
the day, the matter went for hearing and before the commencement of
the hearing of this case, the DLHT would have been informed of why the
despite both the applicant and the respondent being present and Mr.
Not only that but also, the DLHT records indicate that from the
beginning of the proceedings until the day the decision was delivered, the
present. If this is the case, then why was a power of attorney necessary?
6
the court's jurisdiction could appoint another person to prosecute a case
in court on their behalf. The court observed that this would not be proper.
In the case at hand, as I have stated, the records reveal that both
the Donor and Donee live in the same area. Therefore, it was not
Maaiim, who was granted the power of attorney, was conducting cross-
respondent's witnesses. This conduct went far beyond the scope of his
automatically grant the Donee the right to represent the Donor in legal
clearly shows that he was acting like an advocate, which is improper and
illegal.
the court or tribunal due to the reasons stated above, allowing them to
7
meant to appoint someone as their advocate while the Donor is present
as in this case.
powers under Section 43 (1) (b) of the Land Dispute Courts Act, Cap 216
quashes the judgment, and sets aside the resultant decree issued by the
Therefore, I proceed to strike out the purported appeal with costs. Anyone
Jfris^o ordered.
Judge
CourtT Ruling delivered in Mtwara on this 19th day of June 2024 in the
Judge
19/6/2024