Court clears AG to challenge TAZARA payout
DAR ES SALAAM: THE Court of Appeal has allowed the Attorney General to challenge payments of over 1.45bn/- to some former employees of the Tanzania Zambia Railways Authority (TAZARA), as subsistence allowance for 427 days.
Judge Patricia Fikirini ruled against 29 TAZARA ex-employees after granting an application by the AG for extension of time within which to file revision proceedings to oppose the Judgment and Decree of Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court, under extended jurisdiction.
“I therefore grant the application and extend the time for the applicant [AG] to lodge the intended revision within sixty (60) days from the date hereof,” the judge said in the ruling dated July 23, 2025 after considering some illegalities allegedly committed by the lower court.
She ruled that the alleged illegalities, such as awarding interest in a labour matter against the governing law; awarding an excessive interest rate of 30 per cent per annum, and mischaracterisation of paid salaries during the waiting period were substantial and deserved the attention of the Court of Appeal.
“In my considered view, the application has merit. It is well established that the existence of illegality on the face of the record may constitute good cause sufficient to warrant an extension of time, even without a full accounting of the delay,” the judge said.
In the decision, dated February 7, 2000, the Temeke District Court held that the former employees were entitled to a subsistence allowance.
This was despite the fact that TAZARA had provided accommodation and continued to pay monthly salaries while the employees awaited repatriation.
The Court, whose decision was confirmed by Kisutu Court on appeal, awarded a subsistence allowance for 427 days, together with interest at the rate of 30 per cent per annum from July 1, 1998 until full payment, along with the costs of the case, totalling 1.45bn/-.
During hearing of the application, the AG was represented by Mr Ayoub Sanga and Ms Frida Mollel, both State Attorneys, TAZARA was represented by Ms Mercy Chimtawi, Senior Legal Counsel, while Mr Job Kerario, learned Counsel, appeared for the former employees.
ALSO READ: China’s CADFUND announces plan to upgrade TAZARA
In support of the application, Mr Sanga contended that the decision of the lower court is marred by three apparent illegalities justifying intervention by the Court of Appeal, including the unlawful award of interest in a labour matter.
He argued that, under Rule 51 of the Labour Court Rules, interest is not a permissible remedy in labour disputes unless the case is frivolous or vexatious, which was not the case in the present application.
The state attorney submitted that the 30 per cent interest imposed was excessive, as the rate far exceeded the limits prescribed under Order XX Rule 29 (1) of the Civil Procedure Code (Cap. 33 Revised Laws), which provides for a rate between 7 per cent and 12 per cent. He told the court further that there was improper treatment of salaries and accommodation as non-subsistence allowances.
According to him, the court’s failure to recognise that salaries and accommodation constituted subsistence allowance support resulted in a misapplication of the law, which prejudiced TAZARA.
In contrast, Mr Kerario, for the ex-employees, strongly opposed the application, contending that no illegality existed in the decisions warranting the extension, as the lower Court awarded interest in a Civil suit and not a Labour matter.
He submitted that although the dispute originated before a Labour Officer, it later became a civil matter upon reaching the District Court, thus, the interest awarded was within the Court’s jurisdiction.
The learned counsel also contended that the 30 per cent rate, while excessive, constituted a judicial error, not an illegality and could have been challenged via appeal, not revision.
