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.
7 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Outcomes
  • Topics
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
7 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
September 1989
Failure to extract and include the decree in the record of appeal renders the appeal incompetent and it is struck out with costs.
Civil procedure – Appeal – Record of appeal – Requirement to extract and include the decree appealed against – Failure to do so is an omission of an essential step and renders appeal incompetent. Court of Appeal Rules – Rule 3 – Power to depart from practice cannot be used to assume jurisdiction where none exists. Competence of applications – Extension of time, leave to file supplementary record and withdrawal applications made after appeal rendered incompetent are themselves incompetent. Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.11(1) – power to extend time for notice of intention to appeal lies with High Court in prescribed circumstances.
7 September 1989
Reported
Civil Practice and Procedure - Plaint - Relief sought - Plaint must show reliefs sought - Effect of non-compliance - O.VIl Rule 7 Civil Procedure Code, 1966. Labour Law - Gratuity - Condition for payment of gratuity
7 September 1989
Conviction unsafe where single, inconsistent witness identification and improperly admitted police statement undermined prosecution case.
Criminal law — admissibility of police statements — Section 10(6) Criminal Procedure Act 1985 limits use of police statements to corroborate a witness; Evidence Act s166; Evidence — impeachment of witness — requirement to treat witness as hostile under s164 before using former inconsistent statements; Identification evidence — dangers of convicting on single, intoxicated nighttime witness; Failure to call crucial witness — adverse inference where central eyewitness not produced.
7 September 1989
Appeal allowed: lack of evidence of ambush and possible provocation reduced murder conviction to manslaughter with seven‑year term.
Criminal law – Provocation as defence to murder – Assessors’ opinions and trial judge’s summing-up – Pre‑meditation/waylaying must be supported by evidence – Conviction unsafe where ambush not proved – Reduction of murder to manslaughter (s.201 Penal Code).
7 September 1989
Murder conviction and death sentence upheld despite misdirected reliance on an unproved motive and procedural shortcomings.
Criminal law – murder – eyewitness evidence by child witnesses corroborated by post‑mortem – conviction upheld. Criminal law – insanity defence – psychiatric observation report found sane; no sufficient evidence of insanity. Criminal law – malice aforethought – grievous harm established by severe blow; section 200(a) satisfied. Criminal procedure – prosecutor’s opening address is not evidence; courts must not rely on unproved matters in openings. Criminal procedure – procedural irregularities (child witness procedure, assessors, sentencing form) noted but held harmless.
7 September 1989
Murder conviction and death sentence upheld where child witnesses and post‑mortem corroborated deliberate killing despite procedural flaws.
Criminal law – murder – evidence of child witnesses corroborated by post‑mortem establishes guilt; malice aforethought may be inferred from force of blow Criminal law – insanity defence – psychiatric report held appellant sane at time of offence; defence not established Criminal procedure – prosecutorial opening must not advance matters unsupported by evidence; counsel should make final submissions to correct misstatements Procedural irregularities (oath of child witnesses; assessors; sentencing format) criticized but held not to vitiate conviction
7 September 1989
Appeal allowed: conviction unsafe due to unsupported finding of ambush and unresolved provocation; appellant acquitted.
Criminal law – Murder – reliability of eyewitness identification – provocation and its assessment – misdirection on premeditation/ambush – safety of conviction.
7 September 1989