Court of Appeal of Tanzania

This is the highest level in the justice delivery system in Tanzania. The Court of Appeal draws its mandate from Article 117(1) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. The Court hears appeals  on both point of law and facts for cases originating from the High Court of Tanzania and Magistrates with extended jurisdiction in exercise of their original jurisdiction or appellate and revisional jurisdiction over matters originating in the District Land and Housing Tribunals, District Courts and Courts of Resident Magistrate. The Court also hears similar appeals  from quasi judicial bodies of status equivalent to that of the High Court. It  further hears appeals  on point of law against the decision of the High Court in  matters originating from Primary Courts. The Court of Appeal also exercises jurisdiction on appeals originating from the High Court of Zanzibar except for constitutional issues arising from the interpretation of the Constitution of Zanzibar and matters arising from the Kadhi Court.

Physical address
26 Kivukoni Road Building P.O. Box 9004, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.
31 judgments
Skip past Court registries
Skip past years
Skip past months
Skip to results

Results. 31 judgments found.

31 judgments
May 2015
Adoption granted where abandoned child’s best interests required placement with fit petitioners; parental consent dispensed.
  • Family law
    • — Adoption law — best interests of the child — Abandoned child and placement outside children's home in favour of family care
    • — Adoption procedure — Requirement and dispensation of parental consent where parents unknown/deserted
30 May 2015
Appeal allowed: night-time visual identification was unsafe; convictions quashed and sentences set aside.
  • Criminal law — Evidence — visual identification
    • — Appellate duty to re-evaluate identification evidence
    • — cautionary principles: source and intensity of light, proximity and duration of observation, descriptive particulars, prompt naming and police identification procedures
    • — Delay in naming suspect undermines credibility
29 May 2015
Court quashed conviction where accused's plea was equivocal and trial court failed to follow statutory plea and conviction procedure.
  • Criminal procedure — plea of guilty — Unequivocal plea — Duty to record statement of facts and enter conviction under s.235 CPA
29 May 2015
Conviction based on night-time visual identification unsafe where witnesses failed to describe source and intensity of light.
  • Criminal law — Visual identification — reliability of visual identification at night — Requirement to describe lighting, distance and opportunity to observe
29 May 2015
Conviction quashed where night-time visual identification was unsafe due to failure to describe source and intensity of light.
  • Appellate practice — Appellate review — concurrent findings disturbed where lower courts misdirect on crucial evidence
  • Criminal law — identification evidence
  • Criminal law — Visual identification
    • — descriptive particulars
    • — identification parade recommended
    • — night-time identification
    • — proximity and time of observation
29 May 2015
Convictions quashed where identification and recent‑possession evidence failed to reliably link appellants to the stolen engines.
  • Criminal law
    • — Identification parade — dock identification valueless without parade
    • — Visual identification — requirement that visual identification be watertight and eliminate possibilities of mistaken identity — Waziri Amani principles
    • — doctrine of recent possession — Elements required: possession, positive identification, recentness
28 May 2015
Failure to give pre-parade suspect descriptions and identify special marks of stolen cattle undermined the prosecution's case.
  • Criminal procedure — identification parade: identifying witness must give detailed pre-parade description of suspects; parade without such description is unreliable
  • Evidence — stolen property: owner must describe special marks of property before tendering exhibits to avoid mistaken identity. Co-accused acquittal: failure to call/acquit a key witness found with stolen property may create reasonable doubt affecting others' convictions
28 May 2015
Conviction for robbery set aside where recent possession and identification of stolen items were inadequately proved.
  • Criminal law — Robbery with violence — Doctrine of recent possession — Requirements for invocation (possession, positive identification, recency, subject of charge)
  • Criminal procedure — identification parade — Compliance with Police General Orders No. 232 (prior description, timing, right to friend/solicitor) — Fair conduct and adherence to Police General Orders
  • Evidence — Identification of exhibits — owner should give detailed description/special marks before tendering stolen items — Nassoro s/o Mohamedi principle
28 May 2015
Court restored armed robbery conviction and 30-year sentence where possession and corroborative exhibits supported complainant’s credible evidence.
  • Criminal law — Armed robbery — sufficiency of evidence and corroboration
  • Criminal law — Visual identification
    • — Concurrent findings of fact and appellate interference
    • — Exhibits linking accused to offence
    • — identification parade not always required where arrest in possession and prompt recovery
    • — Revisional power s.4(2) AJA
28 May 2015
A resident magistrate with extended jurisdiction cannot try a case transferred after plea and preliminary hearing in the High Court.
  • Criminal procedure — transfer to Resident Magistrate with extended jurisdiction — Timing of transfer under s 256A(1) Criminal Procedure Act — s.256A Criminal Procedure Act
  • Jurisdiction — invalid transfer to Principal Resident Magistrate (Extended Jurisdiction) — proceedings nullity
28 May 2015
Transfer to a magistrate after High Court plea and preliminary hearing is invalid; ensuing trial is a nullity and the case is remitted.
  • Criminal procedure — transfer — Plea and preliminary hearing form part of trial — Trial conducted after High Court’s plea/preliminary hearing is a nullity — Remittal to High Court
28 May 2015
Conviction quashed due to inadequate identification, failure to inquire into voluntariness of confession, and omission of a key prosecution witness.
  • Criminal law — visual identification and identification parade — Dock identification — dangers and requirements for identification parades
  • Evidence
    • — Duty to call material witnesses — adverse inference where prosecutor fails to call accessible, connected witnesses (Aziz Abdallah)
    • — voluntariness and admissibility of cautioned statements — Requirement of objection and trial‑within‑trial to test voluntariness — Evidence Act s 27
28 May 2015
Conviction quashed where identification was unreliable, cautioned statement potentially involuntary, and prosecution failed to call a crucial witness.
  • Criminal law — Visual identification — dock identification and necessity of identification parade
  • Criminal procedure — Failure to call material witnesses — Failure to call crucial witness undermining recovery evidence
  • Evidence — Confession — Where repudiated and torture alleged, trial‑within‑trial required
28 May 2015
Summary rejection of an appeal was illegal; appellant had validly given timely notice and the appeal is restored.
  • Criminal procedure — Notice of Intention to Appeal — time limits
    • — Court of Appeal revisional powers to quash irregular High Court orders
    • — giving notice to prison authorities satisfies CPA requirement
28 May 2015
Summary rejection of appeal quashed where notice given to prison authorities satisfied statutory requirement.
  • Appellate practice — Appellate jurisdiction — Revisionary powers — Use of AJA s 4(2) to nullify and set aside High Court orders
  • Criminal procedure
    • — Appeals — Summary rejection of appeal — Whether summary rejection proper where notice was given to prison authorities within time
    • — Notice of Intention to Appeal
28 May 2015
Proceedings by a successor magistrate without recorded reasons are null and sentences exceeding statutory magistrate limits are illegal.
  • Criminal law — Sentencing limits — Ultra vires sentence exceeding statutory maximum under section 170(1) — Imposition of imprisonment over five years illegal absent High Court confirmation or Minimum Sentences Act scheduling
  • Criminal procedure — Reassignment of magistrate — Requirement to record reasons under section 214(1) CPA — Failure renders successor's proceedings a nullity
27 May 2015
Unrecorded transfer of a trial and excessive sentences invalidate proceedings and justify release.
  • Criminal procedure — Appellate revisional powers
    • — No retrial where substantial illegal sentence served
    • — quashing proceedings and setting aside illegal sentences
  • Criminal procedure — Defective Notices of Appeal — competence and discretion
  • Criminal procedure — reassignment of partly heard trial
27 May 2015
Improper handling and non-production of confessional statements in presence of assessors caused miscarriage of justice and ordered retrial.
  • Appellate practice — Appellate jurisdiction — Power
  • Civil procedure — trial irregularity — may cause miscarriage of justice
  • Criminal procedure — admissibility of confessional/extra-judicial statements in trials with assessors — assessors should retire before hearing evidence on admissibility
27 May 2015
Murder conviction quashed where asphyxia was inadequately investigated and prosecution evidence was insufficient.
  • Criminal law — Murder — proof of death and cause — Requirement to prove cause and manner of death beyond reasonable doubt
  • Evidence
    • — Post‑mortem report establishing cause of death — Post‑mortem establishing cause of death — Adequacy of internal and airway examinations to determine asphyxia
    • — doctrine of last person seen with the deceased — Corroboration requirement and burden shift — Whether last‑seen evidence can ground conviction without corroboration
25 May 2015
A court cannot nullify transfers affecting the applicant without hearing her; such a decision is void and must be quashed.
  • Land law — natural justice
    • — audi alteram partem
    • — constitutional right to be heard (Art.13)
  • Land law — non-joinder of purchaser
  • Land law — registered transfers and mortgage
  • Land law — revisional jurisdiction
    • — Order I r.10(2) CPC
    • — quash and remit for de novo hearing
15 May 2015
Preliminary objections raising disputed facts and discretion are improper; stay application under Rule 4(2) is competent and objections overruled with costs.
  • Civil procedure — locus standi of Attorney General under s.17(2) of Office of the Attorney General Act
    • — Court’s discretionary power to grant stay pending revision
    • — question of public interest/public property is factual
  • Civil procedure — Preliminary objections
13 May 2015
Applications for extension of time to file a notice of appeal must first be made to the High Court under Rule 47.
  • Civil procedure
    • — extension of time to file notice of appeal — Requirement to first apply to the High Court under Rule 47 and s.11(1) AJA — Exception limited to criminal matters
    • — Court of appeal rules, rule 106 — Failure to file written submissions within 60 days under Rule 106(1) — Raised but not determined due to dispositive Rule 47 objection
13 May 2015
Review refused: Rule 66(1) confines review to manifest errors or nullities; re-assessment of evidence is not permitted.
  • Civil procedure — Debenture — substantive powers governed by debenture
  • Civil procedure — Review
    • — Manifest error on face of record
    • — nullity
    • — review not a vehicle to re‑assess evidence or re‑argue issues
13 May 2015
Application struck out because the supporting affidavit was unsourced hearsay and not within the advocate's personal knowledge.
  • Civil procedure
    • — Affidavit evidence — advocate as deponent — Advocate's personal knowledge requirement
    • — preliminary points of objection — Defective affidavit as ground to strike out application
8 May 2015
An interlocutory High Court order not finally determining rights is not appealable; notice of appeal struck out with costs.
  • Appellate practice — Appealability of interlocutory orders — Whether an interlocutory High Court order is appealable under section 5(2)(d) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act — Appellate Jurisdiction Act s 5(2)(d)
  • Civil procedure — striking out notice of appeal — grounds: no appeal lies or essential step not taken — Rule 89(2) Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules
6 May 2015
The applicant's extension application was struck out for relying on repealed rules and failing to cite the correct enabling provision.
  • Civil procedure
    • — Court of Appeal — application for extension of time
    • — Preliminary objections — a single decisive point can dispose of multiple preliminary issues
    • — Procedural competence — wrong or non-citation of the enabling provision — renders application incompetent and liable to be struck out
5 May 2015
Review dismissed: applicants' complaints required reassessment of evidence, not manifest error or nullity.
  • Civil procedure — Review
    • — decision nullity — Failure to raise issue at earlier stage does not render earlier judgment a nullity
    • — Manifest error on the face of the record — Limited scope of review
5 May 2015
Preliminary objections raising disputed facts and discretional issues are inappropriate and were overruled with costs.
  • Civil procedure
    • — Preliminary objections — Objections based on disputed facts or discretionary matters are inappropriate at preliminary stage (Mukisa test)
    • — Stay of execution — Application under Rule 4(2)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules where no notice of appeal has been filed and revision pending
  • Administrative law — Office of the Attorney General Act s.17(2) — Duty to notify court and show public interest/public property when joining proceedings
4 May 2015
Bail is barred for illicit drug trafficking charges; High Court properly denied the applicant bail.
  • Criminal procedure — Bail
4 May 2015
Review application struck out as it raised appeal issues, not the manifest error required for review.
  • Civil procedure
    • — Review of Court of Appeal judgment — manifest error on face of record, nullity, perjury — re-assessment of evidence is not a ground for review
    • — Review of judgment — distinction between ground for appeal and review — Improper grounds of appeal cannot be converted into review
4 May 2015
Failure to produce a lodged notice of appeal renders an application for stay of execution incompetent.
  • Civil procedure — Stay of execution pending appeal — procedural requirements for lodging and prosecuting an appeal — Rule 11(2)(b) and Rule 83, Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009
4 May 2015