Lyimo v. Lyimo (PC) Civ. App. 4-A-70; 30/3/71; Kwikima Ag. J.

 Lyimo v. Lyimo (PC) Civ. App. 4-A-70; 30/3/71; Kwikima Ag. J.

This is an application to appeal in causa pauperis. The parties are father and son fighting over a piece of land. The applicant, the son, gave as reasons for this application that he did not have any income. There was evidence that he had been able to pay the court fees in the lower courts:

Held: (1) And yet the applicant is in occupation of fully developed piece of land. Had he been as destitute as he would like this court to believe, he should have approached the lower courts right away. They would then have referred him to the administrations that are in a better position to assess the ability or inability of a litigant to meet the court fees. The applicant whole claim has failed in both courts below is acting inconsistently when he decided that he should have it free this time when the had already proved his ability to pay for litigation which is taken in futility and even spite. (2) it is becoming fashionable these days for kihamba occupiers to pretend that they are destitute. It must be brought home to all those who are similarly inclined that litigation costs money and that before embarking on it one should have not only the money but a fairly good claim. They should be dissuaded in persuing hopeless claims which have no chance of winning and if they have to take such claims to court they should pay for them. In this case the applicant has consistently lost in his bid to evict his own father. I cannot see any conceivable explanation form his move to avoid paying fees in a case which he is very likely to lose. Accordingly his application is rejected. The applicant should pay the fees if he still wishes to persue his doubtful claim. (3) Application dismissed.