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.
119 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
119 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
August 2019
Minor charge defects and inconsistencies, and an improperly tendered PF3, did not vitiate the conviction which was upheld.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence (s.154 Penal Code) – Charge irregularity cured under s.388(1) CPA; minor contradictions and time variance immaterial; PF3 improperly tendered and expunged but remaining evidence sufficient to sustain conviction.
30 August 2019
Minor variances and an improperly tendered PF3 did not vitiate conviction; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence – sufficiency of evidence – in flagrante findings and medical signs can sustain conviction even if PF3 is expunged. Criminal procedure – Charge-sheet defects – incorrect citation of statutory subsection curable under CPA s.388(1) if particulars inform accused. Evidence – Contradictions and inconsistencies – minor discrepancies (time, name) not material unless they go to root of case. Evidence admissibility – PF3 must be tendered by its author; improper tendering warrants expungement.
30 August 2019
The applicant’s conviction affirmed where a stolen phone was traced by IMEI and recent‑possession inference supported guilt.
Criminal law – armed robbery – identification of stolen property by distinctive mark and IMEI number – admissibility and weight of electronic tracking evidence. Doctrine of recent possession – elements and application where stolen item recovered soon after offence. Alibi – requirement that defence evidence cover the material date. Credibility – minor inconsistencies do not necessarily vitiate a coherent prosecution case.
30 August 2019
Reported
A district court revisional order made after the 12‑month limit under s.22(4) MCA is a nullity, rendering any Registrar rectification based on it invalid.
Land law/Procedure – Revision under s.22 Magistrates' Courts Act – twelve‑month limitation runs from termination of primary court proceedings; revisional order made after limitation is nullity – Rectification of Land Register under s.99 Land Registration Act founded on a null revisional order is itself null – Aggrieved party may commence fresh proceedings.
30 August 2019
Assessors’ partisan cross‑examination and the judge’s unexplained divergence from assessors’ opinion vitiated the trial; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Role of assessors – Assessors must aid the judge impartially and must not cross‑examine witnesses as adversaries; such conduct vitiates trial. Evidence – Order of examination – Examination‑in‑chief, cross‑examination and re‑examination sequence must be observed; assessors’ questions are properly asked under s.177 (preferably after re‑examination). Trial irregularity – Failure of judge to give reasons when departing from assessors’ unanimous opinion is a miscarriage of justice. Remedy – Quash proceedings and order retrial where irregularities are incurable.
30 August 2019
Assessors' partisan cross‑examination and unexplained judicial departure vitiated the trial; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Role of assessors – Assessors sit to aid the judge and must remain impartial; they may question witnesses under s.177 Evidence Act but should not cross‑examine as an adverse party. Evidence – Order of examination – Sections 146 and 147 Evidence Act prescribe examination‑in‑chief, cross‑examination, then re‑examination; assessors' intervention should not disrupt this order. Judicial duty – Where a judge departs from assessors' unanimous opinion, reasons should be given; failure to do so may amount to miscarriage of justice. Remedy – Incurable irregularities (assessors acting as adverse party; failure to give reasons) vitiate trial; retrial ordered.
30 August 2019
Conviction quashed where charge omitted material particulars and identification evidence was unsafe.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence (s.154 Penal Code) – necessity to specify subsection and to prove victim’s age where material. Evidence – Identification – requirements for reliable visual identification (source/intensity of light, proximity, time in view, exclusion of others). Procedure – Defective charge particulars and omission of material particulars may render proceedings a nullity; section 388(1) CPA not always curative. Remedy – Retrial not ordered where prosecution evidence is weak and gaps would otherwise be filled to appellant's prejudice.
30 August 2019
An incurably defective charge and lack of tangible evidence preclude retrial; conviction quashed and proceedings nullified.
Criminal procedure – amendment of charge – section 234(1) CPA – amendment appropriate at trial, not on appeal. Criminal procedure – change of magistrate – section 214(1) CPA – predecessor must record reasons and accused informed; omission is material. Retrial – not ordered where charge is incurably defective or prosecution lacks tangible evidence. Appeals – striking out an appeal after it has been heard and determined is improper; striking out denotes incompetence. Evidence – exhibits must be tendered at trial; failure to do so may vitiate conviction.
30 August 2019
Hot pursuit and daylight identification upheld; improperly obtained exhibits expunged but convictions for armed robbery affirmed.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Elements: use/threat of violence and stealing; threat by machete sufficient even if weapon not tendered. Identification – Hot pursuit and daylight observation dispensed with need for identification parade. Evidence – Search and seizure – non-compliance with section 38(1) CPA, absence of independent witness and receipt; improperly obtained exhibits expunged. Procedure – Defective citation in charge sheet not fatal where accused understood charge and were able to defend.
30 August 2019
Hot pursuit and eyewitnesses established armed robbery despite expunging improperly seized exhibits.
Criminal law – Armed robbery under section 287A Penal Code – identification by victims during daylight and hot pursuit; evidentiary procedure – searches and seizures – non‑compliance with section 38(1) CPA, need for independent witness and receipt; emergency search under section 42 CPA; admissibility and expunging of exhibits; charge sheet citation and prejudice.
30 August 2019
Reported
Conviction for trafficking upheld: emergency search, possession, chain of custody and cautioned statement found lawful.
Criminal law – narcotic trafficking; possession and identification of exhibits; search and seizure – emergency search under section 42 CPA; certificate of seizure admissibility; chain of custody – paper trail requirement may be relaxed for exhibits not easily tampered with; cautioned statement – computation of four‑hour interviewing period excluding conveyance time under section 50(2)(a) CPA.
30 August 2019
Failure to file written submissions cannot be waived under Rule 106(19) without exceptional circumstances; review inappropriate to reargue discretion.
Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules 2009, Rules 106(1) and 106(19) – waiver of filing requirements requires exceptional circumstances; failure to file written submissions may justify dismissal. Review under Rule 66 – limited to errors apparent on the face of the record; not an avenue to reargue discretionary rulings. Preliminary objections/points of law raised from the bar – permissible where no contemporaneous objection to the procedure.
30 August 2019
Review dismissed: failure to file written submissions and lack of error apparent cannot sustain review; applicant to pay costs.
Civil procedure — Review jurisdiction under Rule 66 — distinction between an error apparent on the face of the record and an attempt to re‑argue merits; review not an appeal in disguise. Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 — Rule 106(1) (requirement to file written submissions) and Rule 106(19) (waiver for exceptional circumstances) — waiver requires proof of exceptional circumstances, not mere explanation of delay. Preliminary objections — point of law raised from the bar — permissible where no timely objection to the procedure was taken. Right to be heard — non‑compliance with procedural rules does not equate to denial of hearing where party remains before the Court.
30 August 2019
A transfer after plea and preliminary hearing is invalid, rendering ensuing proceedings before a magistrate with extended jurisdiction null.
Criminal procedure — Transfer under section 256A(1) Criminal Procedure Act — Transfer must be before plea and preliminary hearing — Transfer after arraignment is irregular and fatal — Proceedings and orders of magistrate with extended jurisdiction rendered null — Court of Appeal invoking revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA to quash proceedings and direct High Court to resume trial.
30 August 2019
Missing substituted charge sheet and non-compliance with section 231(1) CPA vitiated the trial, requiring retrial.
Criminal procedure – incomplete record of appeal – missing substituted charge sheet and missing ruling on prima facie case – right to access documents for fair trial. Criminal law – charge sheet is foundational; substituted charge must be in record of appeal (Rule 71(4)). Criminal procedure – mandatory compliance with section 231(1) CPA – failure vitiates trial. Remedy – quash convictions and sentences; nullify proceedings and order retrial.
30 August 2019
Missing substituted charge sheet and absent no‑case ruling rendered convictions unsafe; proceedings quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — Complete record of appeal — substituted charge sheet and no-case (prima facie) ruling as essential documents under rule 71(4). Criminal Procedure Act, ss. 230 & 231(1) — mandatory compliance; duty to explain charge and inform accused of rights before defence. Right to fair hearing — access to documents and records for appeal (Article 13(6)(a) implications). Missing primary documents — prejudice to appellate scrutiny; convictions unsafe. Remedy — nullification of proceedings and remittal for retrial before a fresh panel.
30 August 2019
Vehicle owner held in constructive possession of seized rhino horns; three passengers acquitted for lack of proof of knowledge.
Criminal law — possession and knowledge — constructive possession by vehicle owner; Evidentiary chain of custody — continuity of custody for wildlife trophies; Expert identification of wildlife trophies — admissibility and weight; Insufficient proof — presence or suspicious conduct alone does not establish possession.
30 August 2019
Extra-judicial statement voluntary and admissible; illiterate-maker's s.34B statement lacked certification and was expunged; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – confession and extra-judicial statements – voluntariness and timing; Evidence Act s.34B – admissibility of written statements; illiterate maker – requirement that statement be read over and certified; appellate review of late objections; proof beyond reasonable doubt.
30 August 2019
Misapplied voir dire requires corroboration; medical and parental evidence can nonetheless sustain a child sexual-offence conviction.
Criminal law — Sexual offences — Child witness evidence — Section 127(2) Evidence Act (voir dire) — requirement to record sufficient intelligence — section 127(7) Evidence Act — corroboration where voir dire misapplied — medical opinion as corroboration — expunged PF3 not part of case.
30 August 2019
High Court at Songea lacked territorial jurisdiction: tort claim governed by s.18 CPC, appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil Procedure — Place of suing — Distinction between suits relating to immovable property (s.14) and other suits including torts (s.18) — Cause of action governs territorial jurisdiction; annexures to plaint may be considered in jurisdictional inquiry; claims based on same cause of action cannot be severed to create jurisdiction.
29 August 2019
Reported
The appellant's tort claim fell under s.18 CPC; Songea High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction, so appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Territorial jurisdiction – Place of suing – distinction between section 14 (immovable property) and section 18 (other suits/torts) of the Civil Procedure Code – Cause of action determines venue; pleadings and annexures may be considered in jurisdictional inquiry; jurisdiction is statutory and cannot be conferred by parties.
29 August 2019
Court dismisses appeal: action was tort falling under s.18 CPC, Songea High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction; appeal dismissed with costs.
Civil Procedure Code – Place of suiting – distinction between suits relating to immovable property (s.14) and other suits (s.18); territorial jurisdiction; tort of conversion; annexures to plaint as part of pleadings; inability to sever claims arising from same cause of action.
29 August 2019
29 August 2019
Magistrate's refusal to allow an extra prosecution witness and closure of the prosecution case vitiated the trial.
Criminal procedure – Prosecution's prerogative to close its case – Trial magistrate has no power to close prosecution case. Fair hearing – Article 13(6)(a) – Refusal to allow additional prosecution witness and court closure vitiates trial. Revisional jurisdiction – s.4(2) AJA used to quash proceedings, conviction and sentence and remit for continuation. Applicability of ss.229(1) and 230 Criminal Procedure Act.
29 August 2019
Appellate court quashes convictions where robbery particulars were defective and cautioned statements and identification evidence were irregular.
Criminal law — defective particulars of robbery — requirement to specify person threatened; admissibility of cautioned statements — four-hour rule, correct statutory provision, and reading out in court; identification evidence — parade and conditions of ID; requirement of search and seizure certificate for recovered exhibits; effect of Act No.2/2010 on DPP fiat for arms offences; appellate competence to consider only grounds raised in lower courts.
29 August 2019
Victim's credible identification, corroborated by medical evidence and proper voir dire, upheld rape conviction and mandatory life sentence.
Criminal law – Rape of a girl under ten years – Identification – Familiarity between victim and accused and failure to challenge identification by cross‑examination. Evidence – Child witness – Voir dire and admissibility of unsworn evidence; requirement to assess credibility and need for corroboration. Medical evidence – PF.3 and clinician’s testimony corroborating penetration. Appellate review – Concurrent findings of fact will not be disturbed unless perverse or demonstrably wrong. Sentencing – Mandatory life sentence for rape of child under ten years.
29 August 2019
Failure to allow the accused to admit or dispute each fact made the plea equivocal and the conviction unsafe.
Criminal procedure – Plea of guilty – Requirement to explain ingredients and ask accused to admit/deny each constituent – Statement of facts must be met by accused's opportunity to dispute or explain – Equivocal plea renders conviction unsafe – Quash and remit for retrial.
29 August 2019
Appellant's guilty plea was equivocal because he was not asked to admit or deny each constituent fact; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Plea-taking – Requirement under section 228 CPA that accused be asked to admit or deny the substance/constituent facts of the charge before conviction on plea of guilty. Equivocal plea – Where facts are read and the record shows 'All facts have not been disputed' without the accused being asked to respond, the plea is equivocal and conviction unsafe. Remedy – Quashing of conviction and sentence and remittal for retrial with a fresh plea.
29 August 2019
An equivocal guilty plea, where the accused is not asked to admit or deny each fact, vitiates conviction and requires retrial.
Criminal procedure – Plea of guilty – Requirement to explain each constituent element and to ask accused to admit or deny each fact – Equivocal plea where accused not given chance to dispute or explain facts – Section 228 Criminal Procedure Act – Retrial ordered.
29 August 2019
A truthful child witness’s testimony can alone sustain conviction for a sexual offence under the amended Evidence Act.
Evidence Act (Act No. 4 of 2016) — child witnesses: s127(2) competence without oath on promise to tell truth; s127(6) — conviction may follow on uncorroborated child evidence if court records reasons for believing the child; preliminary hearing (s192 CPA) does not mandate listing all prosecution witnesses; factual testimony by first responders admissible; medical reports expunged but oral medical evidence may corroborate injuries; standard — proof beyond reasonable doubt.
29 August 2019
Visual identification upheld; armed robbery conviction sustained, but grievous-harm convictions quashed as duplicative.
Criminal law – Visual identification – familiarity, adequate lighting, proximity and duration as safeguards against mistaken identity. Criminal procedure – concurrent factual findings by trial and first appellate courts – appellate interference only if findings are unreasonable or perverse. Offences – armed robbery and grievous harm – duplicity of charges where assaults forming part of same transaction as robbery. Evidence – alibi and unpursued allegations of grudge – failure to cross-examine undermines such allegations. Medical evidence – supported injuries but conviction for assault cannot stand where duplicative of robbery charge.
29 August 2019
Appellant awarded 50% shares in matrimonial properties transferred without consent; appeal allowed in part.
Family law — Matrimonial property — Determination and distribution of assets acquired during marriage; spouse's consent required for transfer under s.161(3) Land Act; transfer without consent gives spouse a voidable remedy or entitlement to share of proceeds. Civil procedure — Record of appeal defects — non‑compliance with Court of Appeal Rules not fatal where no prejudice and substantial compliance. Contribution — Non‑monetary contributions (household labour, informal earnings) relevant to division; appellate variation of division from 20% to 50%.
29 August 2019
Missing charge sheet and failure to comply with s.231(1) CPA vitiated convictions; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — incomplete record on appeal — substituted charge sheet missing — no‑case to answer/prima facie ruling absent — non‑compliance with s.231(1) CPA — right to fair trial — convictions quashed and retrial ordered.
29 August 2019
Reported
High Court suo motu compensation order quashed for violating the appellant's right to be heard; other grounds struck out.
Appellate procedure – appeal from Primary Court – certification of point of law under s.5(2)(c) AJA; natural justice – right to be heard – court cannot make suo motu compensation order without hearing parties; locus standi – complaints affecting non‑parties require appropriate parties and evidence; factual issues are not points of law.
28 August 2019
28 August 2019
Unreliable identification and improperly admitted confessions vitiated conviction; appeal allowed and appellants acquitted.
Criminal law – visual identification – Waziri Amani safeguards – dock identification without parade unreliable. Evidence – cautioned statements – objection alleging torture requires immediate inquiry into voluntariness; failure renders statements inadmissible. Evidence – extrajudicial statements – inadmissible if read before admissibility ascertained or if unconnected to charged offence. Criminal Procedure Act s.240(3) – medical reports require compliance and opportunity for cross‑examination. Criminal procedure – duty to evaluate accused’s defence (alibi); failure is serious error.
28 August 2019
A land claim filed after the 12‑year statutory limitation is time‑barred and deprives the tribunal of jurisdiction.
Limitation of actions – Land disputes – Paragraph 22, First Schedule to the Law of Limitation Act – 12‑year prescription for land ownership claims – tribunal lacks jurisdiction where claim is filed after limitation period.
28 August 2019
Reported
Third party impleader is for contribution/indemnity; business interruption damages must be specially pleaded and proved, and were not awarded.
Civil procedure – Order 1 Rule 14 CPC – third party impleader – scope limited to contribution/indemnity but where liability is admitted dispute may be about quantum only. Insurance law – scope of cover – fire policy does not automatically cover business interruption; special damages (loss of profit) must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved. Evidence – trial court entitled to rely on contemporaneous stock records over opposing expert estimate where records found credible.
28 August 2019
A competent child’s credible uncorroborated testimony can sustain a rape conviction despite PF3 or medical-evidence issues.
Criminal law — Evidence Act s.127(2) and s.127(7) — Competency of child witness and reliability of uncorroborated testimony in sexual offences; PF3 evidential role and non‑dispositive medical evidence; inadmissibility of new grounds on second appeal; relatives as competent witnesses; s.143 — no prescribed number of witnesses.
28 August 2019
Court quashed murder convictions because night identifications were unsafe and alibi defences were improperly disregarded.
Criminal law — Identification evidence at night — necessity for description, source and intensity of light, observation distance and prompt naming; Alibi — notice and particulars under section 194 CPA, allocation of burden and judicial duty to consider alibi; Witness credibility — effect of delays in recording statements and inconsistencies with investigative sketch map; Safety of conviction where identification and alibi treatment are defective.
28 August 2019
Court permitted substitution of bank guarantee with Certificate of Occupancy as security for stay of execution, refusing to decide ownership disputes.
Civil procedure — stay of execution — security for stay — variation of form of security under Rule 4(2)(a),(b) where Rules are silent on variation. Evidence — suitability of substitute security — valuation report and ownership documentation. Procedural limitation — interlocutory applications should not decide substantive ownership or fraud issues already reserved for appeal or proper forum.
28 August 2019
Assessors' improper cross-examination and doubtful identification made convictions unsafe; appeal allowed and appellants released.
Criminal procedure — role of assessors — assessors must not cross-examine witnesses; Summing-up — judge must not express personal views or unduly influence assessors; Identification — caution required for visual or voice ID at night, in crowds or with inadequate light; Alibi — trial judge must direct assessors on the law of alibi and not shift burden; Retrial — not ordered where prosecution evidence is materially discrepant.
27 August 2019
Assessors’ improper cross‑examination and judge’s influence, plus unreliable identification, vitiated convictions; appeal allowed and appellants released.
Criminal procedure – assessors’ role – assessors not entitled to cross‑examine witnesses; such conduct vitiates trial. Criminal procedure – summing up – trial judge must not express own factual views or unduly influence assessors and must direct on legal defences (eg, alibi). Evidence – visual/voice identification – identification at night, in charged crowds and without clear description of lighting is unsafe. Remedy – where trial irregularities combine with materially discrepant prosecution evidence a retrial may be inappropriate; release ordered.
27 August 2019
Court expunged an improperly admitted confession, found defective summing-up and unsafe identification, quashing convictions and ordering release.
Criminal procedure – assessors – duty of trial judge to sum up adequately on all vital points of law and facts; summing up which misdirects assessors renders trial a nullity. Evidence – confessional/cautioned statement – onus to prove voluntariness rests on prosecution; assessors must be retired during mini-trial; failure to comply renders confession inadmissible. Evidence – visual identification – conditions at scene, duration of observation, inconsistencies and unexplained delays in arrest affect reliability; identification must be watertight to ground conviction. Retrial – principles limiting retrial where original evidence is insufficient and retrial would unfairly advantage prosecution.
27 August 2019
A charge citing a non-existent provision and omitting "carnal knowledge" is fatally defective, nullifying the trial and conviction.
Criminal law – Charge sheet errors – Citing non-existent statutory provision; particulars must disclose essential elements ("carnal knowledge") – Fatal defect, trial nullity – Sufficiency of prosecution evidence for rape (penetration) – When retrial is inappropriate.
27 August 2019
The appellants' murder convictions were quashed for procedural irregularities and insufficient admissible circumstantial evidence.
Criminal procedure — assessors — improper summing up and influence on assessors; Evidence — section 34B Evidence Act — statutory conditions for tendering written statements not complied with; Evidence — section 198 CPA — testimony must be on oath or affirmation; Criminal procedure — section 293/230 CPA — finding of no case to answer and procedure before calling accused to defend; Circumstantial evidence — suspicion insufficient to ground conviction; Retrial — not ordered where remaining admissible evidence is insufficient.
27 August 2019
Late filing of notice of intention to appeal renders the appeal incompetent and should be struck out, not dismissed.
Criminal procedure – late filing of notice of intention to appeal – effect is incompetence and requires striking out, not dismissal; right to be heard; s.361(1) CPA; revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA.
27 August 2019
Convictions quashed where identification evidence was unreliable and the trial court wrongly dismissed properly notified alibis.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Night-time sightings, source and intensity of light, distance and prior acquaintance; Defence of alibi — statutory notice, evidential weight and burden to disprove; Conviction unsafe where identification and alibi improperly handled.
27 August 2019
The applicant’s rape conviction upheld; victim’s uncorroborated descriptive testimony and medical evidence sufficed.
Sexual offences — Evidence of child of tender years — Corroboration not mandatory under s.127(7) Evidence Act; victim's uncorroborated but credible testimony may suffice. Medical evidence — PF3 may confirm penetration though absence of bruises is explicable by delay. Corroborative circumstances — descriptive account of accused's room as corroboration. Second appeal — concurrent findings of fact should not be disturbed absent misdirection or miscarriage of justice.
27 August 2019
Child's unsworn testimony corroborated by eyewitness and medical evidence upheld conviction; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Unnatural offence against a child; identification evidence; child witness — voire dire and unsworn testimony; medical evidence (PF.3) corroboration; cautioned statement improperly admitted under s.34B(1) Evidence Act; appellate re-evaluation of evidence.
27 August 2019