IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bdu/ojijlp/v8y2023i1p12-27id1863.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Party Litigation in Tanzania: A Case for Class Action Suits

Author

Listed:
  • Naufal Kitonka

Abstract

Purpose: In suits involving numerous parties, legal technicalities are involved. Such suits call for special litigation devices. Multiparty litigation devices in Tanzania can take different forms such as joinder, next of kin, representative suits and class action suits. However, representative suit is currently the main means of handling claims for compensation involving large groups of similarly affected victims. Methodology: This study carries out an appraisal of the legal framework in Tanzania concerning multiparty litigation devices. It is shown that too strict an adherence to same interest and locus standi requirements in Tanzania makes multiparty litigation devices too restrictive. In addition, multiparty litigation devices for group actions are not clearly provided for. Findings: Litigation devices have a great potential of helping parties to realize effective right to remedy. In order for litigation devices to effectively play that role, they should be friendly, timely and affordable. Similarly, such devices should be properly managed and clearly provided for under legislations. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: Currently, a representative suit in Tanzania is interchangeably used both in public interest litigation and group action. In order to guarantee proper management of group actions, a case for class action rules is made. Indeed, a call for reform of the legal framework is recommended in this study to the effect that class action rules should be enacted in form of regulations or under a specific legislation.

Suggested Citation

  • Naufal Kitonka, 2023. "Multi-Party Litigation in Tanzania: A Case for Class Action Suits," International Journal of Law and Policy, IPRJB, vol. 8(1), pages 12-27.
  • Handle: RePEc:bdu:ojijlp:v:8:y:2023:i:1:p:12-27:id:1863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://iprjb.org/journals/index.php/IJLP/article/view/1863
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bdu:ojijlp:v:8:y:2023:i:1:p:12-27:id:1863. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chief Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://iprjb.org/journals/index.php/IJLP/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.