|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2010 |
|
|
An appeal is incompetent where the decree lacks a proper date; GN 223/2010 did not cure this defective order.
Civil Procedure – Order XX Rule 7 – requirement that a decree bear the date of pronouncement of judgment or ruling – effect of non‑compliance. Statutory amendment – Government Notice No. 223 of 2010 – insertion of sub‑rule on date of extraction of decree and retrospective application. Procedural vs substantive law – retrospective operation of procedural amendments. Appeal competency – improperly dated decree renders appeal incompetent and liable to be struck out.
|
28 October 2010 |
|
Conviction quashed where identification of the applicants was unreliable and investigative omissions undermined the prosecution.
Criminal law — Armed robbery — Visual identification at night — Dock identification versus identification parade — Necessity of contemporaneous disclosure and police evidence — Appellate interference where misdirection or non-direction affects reliability of identification evidence.
|
22 October 2010 |
|
A defence‑related claim filed after the six‑month statutory period was time‑barred, rendering lower courts’ proceedings nullities.
National Defence Act s.63 – Limitation of actions – Six‑month time limit for suits arising from acts under the Act – Time‑bar renders proceedings a nullity; Limitation preferred to jurisdictional enquiry.
|
22 October 2010 |
|
Appellate court quashed murder conviction due to contradictory identification evidence and reasonable doubt, despite limited procedural oversight.
Criminal law – Identification evidence and credibility – contradictions in prosecution witnesses; Criminal procedure – Preliminary hearing (s.192 CPA and Rule 5) – non-compliance not fatal absent miscarriage of justice; Appellate review – trial judge's summing up and assessors – undue influence and failure to properly evaluate defence; Reasonable doubt – benefit to accused; Conviction quashed and sentence set aside.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
Rape conviction quashed where medical report was inadmissible and penetration was not proved.
Criminal law – Rape – Essential requirement of proof of penetration; evidence must give particulars of what occurred. Criminal procedure – PF3/medical report – Failure to inform accused of right to summon medical officer under s.240(3) renders report valueless. Appellate procedure – Proceedings quashed under s.29(b) Magistrates’ Courts Act are a nullity and cannot be recalled. Second appeal – Court may intervene on questions of law where findings of fact rest on manifestly inadequate evidence.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
Conviction quashed where medical report was inadmissible and prosecution failed to prove penetration.
Criminal law – Rape – proof of penetration as an essential ingredient; PF3 (medical report) inadmissible if accused not informed of right to summon the medical officer; quashed proceedings are a nullity (Magistrates' Courts Act s.29(b)); procedural irregularity in judgment noted but not decisive.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
Court clarified s.192 applies to High Court but, on equivocal evidence, reduced murder conviction and substituted six-year sentence.
Criminal procedure – Section 192 Criminal Procedure Act – preliminary hearing requirement in High Court and subordinate courts; assessors’ opinions – duty to record and reconcile with judge’s findings; appeal – where evidence equivocal, murder conviction may be reduced and sentence substituted; prospective application of a new clarification of procedural law.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
Whether the High Court should admit a late notice under s.361(2); Court restored life sentence and remitted appeal.
Criminal law – Appeal procedure – Notice of intention to appeal – High Court power to admit late notice under s.361(2) Criminal Procedure Act – Good cause required. Civil/criminal procedure – Appellate jurisdiction – Court of Appeal power to depart from Rules (Rule 4(1)) in interests of justice and to exercise revisional power under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act. Sentence – Trial court life sentence restored after High Court's reduction set aside.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
Court may depart from rules and admit out-of-time appeal where High Court wrongly struck it out.
Criminal procedure — notice of intention to appeal — striking out appeal — High Court's discretion to admit appeals out of time under s.361(2) Criminal Procedure Act — Court of Appeal may depart from its rules (Rule 4(1)) and exercise revisionary powers under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act — remittal to High Court for hearing.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
Prisoner’s supported affidavit and prison certificate justified extension of time to lodge appeal; High Court erred in refusing.
Criminal procedure – extension of time under s.361(2) – good cause where prisoner dependent on prison authorities; corroborating prison officer’s certificate – absence of counter‑affidavit – right to be heard; misapplication of restriction on appeals after guilty plea.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
|
18 October 2010 |
|
The Court reduced the appellant's 20-year sentence to 10 years, stressing the weight of guilty plea and mitigating factors.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Appellate review of sentence – Mitigating factors: guilty plea, remand custody, first offender status, age, dependants – Reduction of excessive sentence.
|
18 October 2010 |
|
Weak visual identification offset by recovery of stolen bicycle shortly after the offence; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Visual identification – need for watertight evidence and description of conditions of observation Criminal law – Circumstantial evidence – recovery of stolen property shortly after offence as linking conduct Criminal procedure – Compliance with section 312 Criminal Procedure Act; reading of judgment to accused Evidentiary issues – weight of identification balanced against possession/recovery of stolen goods
|
15 October 2010 |
|
Failure to comply with section 240(3) CPA renders a PF3 inadmissible, but corroborated child testimony can uphold a rape conviction.
Criminal law – Rape of a child – admissibility and sufficiency of child testimony; voir dire and competency under section 127 TEA. Evidence – Documentary evidence – PF3 tendering; non-compliance with section 240(3) CPA renders document inadmissible. Appellate review – Deference to concurrent credibility findings; overturn only for glaring error or misdirection. Proof – Corroboration of unsworn child evidence by close relative and materiality of contradictions.
|
15 October 2010 |
|
Reported
Medical report improperly admitted and expunged; alibi implausible, visual identification credible—appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence – Visual identification – requirement for watertight evidence; Criminal procedure – Section 240(3) CPA – right to call/report‑maker and cross‑examination; Alibi – accused need not prove but must raise reasonable doubt; Appellate review – deference to concurrent findings absent misapprehension or miscarriage of justice.
|
15 October 2010 |
|
PF3 improperly admitted and expunged; alibi failed and visual identification proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt, appeal dismissed.
Criminal procedure – admissibility of medical reports (PF3) – duty under s.240(3) to inform accused of right to require author’s attendance for cross-examination. Evidence – alibi – accused need not prove alibi but must raise reasonable doubt; corroboration not required. Evidence – visual identification – reliability where witnesses knew accused and lighting was sufficient. Appeals – appellate restraint in disturbing concurrent findings of fact unless misapprehension or miscarriage of justice.
|
15 October 2010 |
|
Appeal dismissed: PF3 expunged for non‑compliance, conviction and statutory life sentence upheld.
Criminal law – Evidence – PF3 improperly admitted without maker’s examination contrary to s240(3) CPA – PF3 expunged; Evidence of child witness – voir dire inadequately recorded but unsworn child evidence corroborated by mother; Relatives may testify and their evidence is assessed on merit; Minor discrepancies not fatal to prosecution; Life sentence lawful under s131(3) Penal Code as amended by SOSPA.
|
14 October 2010 |
|
First appellate court's failure to consider appellant's grounds of appeal breached natural justice; appeal ordered reheard.
Criminal law — Appeal procedure — Failure of first appellate court to consider grounds of appeal — Breach of rules of natural justice — Serious misdirection. Exercising revisional powers under section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act to order rehearing.
|
14 October 2010 |
|
Reported
Procedural defects in medical report and child testimony, but admissions and conduct upheld conviction.
Criminal law – sexual offence (rape) – admissibility of PF3/medical report – failure to inform accused of rights under s240(3) CPA – PF3 expunged; Evidence Act s127(2) – voir dire for child witnesses – requirement to establish intelligence, duty to tell the truth and understanding of oath; visual identification – reliability at night and need to prove source/intensity of light; confessions/admissions and conduct – confession in law under s3(1)(a) Evidence Act can prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
13 October 2010 |
|
Recovery of stolen property led by the appellant corroborated guilt, so conviction upheld despite weak visual identification.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification evidence – requirement that identification be watertight before conviction – Waziri Amani principle. Criminal law – Corroboration by recovery of stolen property – accused leading to recovered property shortly after offence as strong link. Criminal procedure – Compliance with section 312 Criminal Procedure Act – judgment read and mitigation heard. Evidence – circumstantial and identification evidence considered together to uphold conviction.
|
13 October 2010 |
|
Reported
Court upheld convictions of appellant‑1 and appellant‑3 on recent possession and confession, but quashed appellant‑2’s unsafe conviction.
Criminal law — admissibility of cautioned and extra-judicial statements — voluntariness — trial-within-trial; Criminal procedure — assessors’ role — voluntariness is a legal issue decided without assessors; Evidence — doctrine of recent possession as corroboration of confession; Accomplice evidence — need for corroboration; Failure to raise procedural objections at trial bars appellate challenge; Calling witness not listed at committal — inadmissible.
|
13 October 2010 |
|
|
12 October 2010 |
|
Unsworn evidence of a child of tender years improperly received must be discarded; without it, rape conviction cannot stand.
Evidence — Rape: proof of penetration is essential; primary evidence should come from the prosecutrix where applicable; medical evidence is corroborative. Child witnesses — section 127(2) Evidence Act and section 198(2) CPA: unsworn evidence of child of tender years admissible only after recorded findings of sufficient intelligence and understanding duty to tell truth. Close-relative witnesses — admissible but credibility must be treated with caution. Sentencing — life imprisonment illegal for offender under eighteen (s.131(2)(a) Penal Code).
|
12 October 2010 |
|
Medical report expunged for procedural breach but conviction upheld on credible eyewitness evidence.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence – sufficiency of evidence where medical report expunged for non-compliance with section 240(3) CPA – conviction may stand on credible eyewitness testimony. Evidence – admissibility of medical reports – mandatory right to summon/report maker under s.240(3) CPA. Appellate review – evaluation of credibility and material contradictions; minor discrepancies not fatal unless they go to the gist of the case.
|
12 October 2010 |
|
Omission to prepare/read the s.192(3) memorandum requires correction; drawing and explaining it cures the defect.
Criminal procedure – Preliminary hearing – Section 192(3) Criminal Procedure Act – Mandatory duty to prepare, read and explain memorandum of matters not in dispute – Non-compliance remedied by ordering memorandum to be drawn from record rather than quashing proceedings.
|
11 October 2010 |
|
The Court substituted armed robbery conviction with receiving stolen property and imposed seven years, finding no identification at the scene.
Criminal law – admissibility of cautioned statement once admitted – trial within a trial; Criminal procedure – alibi notice requirement and effect of non-compliance; Evidence – identification at scene versus possession of stolen property; Revisionary powers – substituting conviction to lesser offence (s.311 Penal Code) under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
11 October 2010 |
|
|
11 October 2010 |
|
Cautioned confession corroborated by recent possession upheld; conviction on uncorroborated accomplice confession quashed.
Criminal law – confession and cautioned statements – admissibility and voluntariness; doctrine of recent possession as corroboration; accomplice evidence and need for corroboration; assessors’ role; committal and procedural compliance in recording statements; appellate restriction on raising unargued trial defects.
|
11 October 2010 |
|
Reported
Whether convictions could stand on retracted/confessed statements and recent possession, and safety of uncorroborated accomplice evidence.
Criminal law – admissibility and voluntariness of extra-judicial and cautioned statements – trial-within-trial – effect of failure to object to recording procedure at trial – recent possession doctrine – accomplice evidence and requirement of corroboration – inadmissible witness called without committal notice.
|
11 October 2010 |
|
Court allowed substitution of an extinct statutory respondent with its statutory successor and permitted amendment of the appeal title.
Court of Appeal – Rule 111 (amendment of record of appeal) – Substitution of parties – Operation of law – Statutory vesting of residual functions under Act No. 26 of 2007 – Consolidated Holding Corporation succeeds PSRC – Costs in the cause.
|
11 October 2010 |
Olam Tanzania Limited and 3 Others vs Seleman S. Selemani and 4 Others (Consolidated Civil Revisions No. 2,3,4,5&6 of 2010; Consolidated Civil Revisions No. 2,3,4,5&6 of 2010; Consolidated Civil Revisions No. 2,3,4,5&6 of 2010; Consolidated Civil Revisions No. 2,3,4,5&6 of 2010; Consolidated Civil Revisions No. 2,3,4,5&6 of 2010) [2010] TZCA 404 (11 October 2010)
District land tribunals may hear Land Act disputes (including mortgages) unless specific statutes or an operational High Court Land Division sub-registry confer exclusive jurisdiction on the High Court.
Land law – jurisdiction of District Land and Housing Tribunals under section 33 of the Land Disputes Courts Act; exclusive jurisdiction of High Court (Land Division) over disputes with specified public corporations where Land Division sub-registry is operational (GN 301/2003, GN 41/1992); mortgage and registered-land disputes cognisable by tribunals subject to pecuniary/territorial limits; local authorities not automatically 'Government' for section 37(1)(c).
|
11 October 2010 |
|
Reported
An appeal grounded on a decree bearing a date different from the judgment is incurably defective and is struck out.
Civil procedure – Appeal competency – Decree must bear the date of the judgment (Order XX Rule 7; Order XXXIX Rule 35(1)); Appeal from subordinate court to High Court must be accompanied by valid decree (Order XXXIX Rule 1(1)) – Incurably defective decree renders appeal incompetent – Court’s power to quash proceedings under section 4(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
11 October 2010 |
|
|
11 October 2010 |
|
Whether the appellants were TRA employees and whether their removal in public interest under section 19(3) was lawful.
Civil service – removal in public interest – section 19(3) Civil Service Act – validity where employee status disputed. Employment status – Establishment Circular No.7/1995 clause 11 – direct transfer, secondment and attachment categories; requirement of government appointment or letters. Administrative law – operationalisation of statutory bodies; effect of commencement date on employment. Delegation and authority – decision of President transmitted by Principal Secretary; limits of delegation. Procedural fairness – disciplinary procedure not applicable to s.19(3) removals; reasons requirement satisfied. Evidence – impermissible judicial reliance on undisclosed personal research; competency/credibility of witnesses present in court.
|
8 October 2010 |
|
Reported
Whether employees were assimilated into a new agency and whether their removal in public interest complied with law.
Administrative law – employment status on transfer to a new agency – Establishment Circular categories (secondment, attachment, direct transfer) – proof of appointment; Civil Service Act s.19(3) – removal in public interest – validity, reasons and non-punitive character; judicial notice/judicial research – reliance on undocumented facts; competency and exclusion of witnesses present in court.
|
8 October 2010 |
|
An appellate court may set aside a sentence when the trial court fails to properly weigh mitigating factors, including children's welfare and time served.
Criminal law – Sentencing – appellate interference – appellate court may disturb sentence where trial court failed to properly weigh mitigating factors. Sentencing – mitigating factors – plea, first offender status, remorse, welfare of dependent children and time spent in custody. Criminal procedure – review of sentence – discretion of trial court v. role of appellate court.
|
8 October 2010 |
|
Failure to inform the appellant of rights under s.293(2) C.P.A. required quashing of subsequent proceedings and resumption of the trial.
Criminal Procedure Act s.293(2) – mandatory duty to inform accused of right to give evidence and call witnesses after prosecution case; Interpretation of Laws Act – "shall" construed as obligatory; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2) – revisional power to quash and order resumption of proceedings.
|
8 October 2010 |
|
Trial court’s failure to inform unrepresented accused of section 231 defence options is a mandatory procedural defect.
Criminal procedure – section 231 Criminal Procedure Act – duty of trial court to inform accused of options for making defence – mandatory requirement. Interpretation Act – meaning of “shall” – mandatory compliance required. Procedural irregularity – failure to inform unrepresented accused of rights – renders proceedings defective.
|
8 October 2010 |
|
Preliminary hearing for murder must be by High Court; mandatory s.192 memorandum requirements must be complied with.
Criminal procedure – Preliminary hearing – Competent court to conduct preliminary hearing in murder cases (High Court) – Memorandum of matters not in dispute – mandatory reading, explanation and signatures under s.192(1)–(4) Criminal Procedure Act – improper admission of extra-judicial statement as exhibit – revisional relief under s.4(3) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
8 October 2010 |
|
Conviction quashed where improper voir dire and defective PF3 left the child’s evidence uncorroborated.
Criminal law – rape – child witness: voir dire under s127(2) TEA; admissibility of PF3 under s240 CPA (right to summon author); requirement of corroboration for irregular child evidence; conviction unsafe where medical report defective and witness accounts inconsistent.
|
7 October 2010 |
|
Nighttime visual and voice identification was unsafe; convictions quashed and death sentences set aside.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at night; insufficiency where lighting, distance and room layout not established; voice identification weak; post‑incident naming unreliable where witness inconsistent.
|
7 October 2010 |
|
Failure to prepare, explain and sign the memorandum at a preliminary hearing breaches mandatory s192(3); court ordered its preparation rather than quashing.
Criminal procedure – Preliminary hearing – Section 192(3) Criminal Procedure Act – mandatory duty to prepare, read, explain and have memorandum of matters not in dispute signed and filed. Effect of non-compliance – section 192(4) deeming provision cannot properly apply where s192(3) requirements were not met. Remedy – Court may order drawing of memorandum from existing record rather than quashing proceedings; strict compliance required in future.
|
7 October 2010 |
|
Rape conviction upheld on complainant’s credible testimony; conviction for impregnating schoolgirl quashed for lack of proof of paternity.
Criminal law – Rape – Conviction may rest on the uncorroborated testimony of a victim if believed by the court (s.127(7) Evidence Act). Criminal law – Impregnation of a school girl – Sexual intercourse alone does not conclusively prove paternity; prosecution must exclude reasonable doubt. Evidence – Photocopy antenatal card used only for identification and not relied upon; no breach of s.240(3) affected outcome.
|
7 October 2010 |
|
Identification and credibility upheld; sentence found illegal for omitting corporal punishment and compensation and remitted for lawful sentencing.
Criminal law – Rape – Identification of accused at scene where complainant knew accused and had close proximity; risk of mistaken identity diminished. Appeals – Appellate deference to trial court findings on credibility absent misdirection. Evidence – Alleged contradictions must be demonstrated as material to vitiate conviction. Procedure – PF3 dating irregularity not fatal where medical exam timely and section 240(3) CPA complied with. Sentencing – Section 131(1) Penal Code mandates imprisonment, corporal punishment and compensation; appellate court may invoke revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA to correct illegal sentence.
|
7 October 2010 |
|
Failure to comply with section 231 CPA and unreliable night identification led to quashing of conviction and release of the appellant.
Criminal procedure – section 231 Criminal Procedure Act – duty of trial court after prosecution close to inform accused of right to give evidence and call witnesses – mandatory requirement – failure vitiates trial. Identification evidence – visual ID at night by torchlight – reliability and sufficiency to support conviction. Remedy – where procedural breach and weak evidence, conviction quashed and accused acquitted rather than retrial ordered.
|
6 October 2010 |
|
Guilty plea unsupported by facts disclosing rape's ingredients is a fatal irregularity; matter remitted for fresh hearing.
Criminal law — guilty plea — necessity that facts read and admitted disclose the ingredients of the offence; fatal irregularity vitiating conviction; appellate revisional power under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act — remittal for fresh hearing.
|
6 October 2010 |
|
Appellate court reduced an excessive 15-year manslaughter sentence to time served, emphasizing children's welfare and time in custody.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Manslaughter – Excessive sentence – Trial court's failure to give adequate weight to mitigating factors (first offender, remorse, welfare of children) – Credit for time spent in custody – Appellate interference with sentence.
|
5 October 2010 |
|
Failure to provide separate counsel after a disclosed conflict vitiated the trial; proceedings quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Right to be defended (s.310 CPA) – Conflict of interest between co-accused – Preliminary hearing and presence of accused's advocate (s.192 CPA) – Irregularities vitiating trial – Retrial ordered (Fatehali Manji and related authorities).
|
5 October 2010 |
|
Short interval identification and weapon display justified conviction and reinstatement of statutory thirty-year sentence.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – visual identification and recent possession; Criminal Procedure Act s.214(1) – discretion of trial magistrate to continue trial; Sentencing – display/use of weapon as satisfying ingredients of armed robbery (s.287A) – appellate reduction for non-use of weapon a misdirection.
|
5 October 2010 |
|
Failure to comply with mandatory s.293(2) CrimPA vitiated subsequent proceedings; Court quashed those proceedings and ordered resumption.
Criminal procedure – section 293(2) Criminal Procedure Act – mandatory duty to inform accused of right to give evidence and call witnesses after prosecution case – failure vitiates subsequent proceedings – appellate revisional powers to quash and order resumption.
|
5 October 2010 |