|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2001 |
|
|
A notice of appeal must be received by a competent registrar; failure and late service render the appeal incompetent.
Court of Appeal – Preliminary objection – Validity of notice of appeal – Requirement of lodging with Registrar/District or Deputy Registrar (rule 76(1)) – Competence of recipient; Service of notice within prescribed time (rule 71(1)) – Substantial compliance doctrine; Failure to comply renders appeal incompetent and liable to be struck out with costs.
|
27 December 2001 |
|
Appellate court held Operation Vijiji reallocated the land and validated the vendor’s sale to the respondent.
Land law – Operation Vijiji reallocation – effect on customary title; Sale of land – vendor’s capacity to sell and proof of transaction; Credibility findings – appellate deference to trial court’s assessment; Evidence – inadmissibility/unstamped documents cannot be first raised on appeal.
|
8 December 2001 |
| September 2001 |
|
|
Revision of stay of garnishee order struck out as time-barred and appealable, requiring leave to appeal.
Civil procedure — Revision v. Appeal — Competence of revision where order is appealable — Leave required under s.5(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act; Time limits for revision (sixty days); Garnishee orders and effect of subsequent consent orders; Procedural fairness and disclosure between counsel.
|
14 September 2001 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure -Appeals - Appeals by the Director of Public
Prosecutions - Notice of Appeal filed by the Regional Crime Officer -
Whether such appeal properly before the Court - Sections 279, 370 and
379(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1985.
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Notice of Appeal by the Director
of Public Prosecutions — Meaning of Director of Public Prosecutions -
Section 377 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1985.
Statute - Interpretation of statute - Cross references to sections in the same
statute - The Criminal Procedure Act 1985 - Meaning of the word “section ”
in section 377 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1985. |
14 September 2001 |
|
Reported
Notice of intention to appeal under section 379(a) must be given by the Director or an officer shown to be subordinate and acting under his instructions.
Criminal Procedure — Appeals by Director of Public Prosecutions — Section 379(a) notice of intention to appeal — who may give notice — section 377 interpretation; subordinate officers acting under general or special instructions; typographical error corrected to 'sections'.
|
14 September 2001 |
(From the Judgment ofthe Resident Magistrate’s Court ofArusha, Extended Jurisdiction, dated 27 October 1998, in Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1998) Criminal Practice and Procedure - Defence - Defence of alibi - Need to give notice of defence of alibi - Section 194 (b) ofthe Criminal Procedure Act 198 |
14 September 2001 |
|
Appellant’s failure to serve required documents and to file an extracted order led to the appeal being struck out.
Civil procedure — Court of Appeal Rules — Service of Notice of Appeal (Rule 77); Supply of copies of proceedings; Extraction and filing of order from lower court judgment (Rule 38); Exemption from rules (Rule 83); Non-compliance warrants striking out appeal.
|
14 September 2001 |
|
An out-of-time application for leave to appeal deprived the High Court of jurisdiction, rendering the purported leave void.
Civil procedure – Time limits and jurisdiction – Application for leave to appeal filed out of time – Registrar’s delay not a sufficient excuse where counsel failed to file or seek extension – Rule 46(3) construed as not imposing annexation requirement for High Court leave applications – Preliminary objection competent to raise jurisdictional/time‑bar issue.
|
14 September 2001 |
Civil Practice and Procedure - Res Judicata - Appellant was not a party to
previous suit but had a common interest with parties on one side - The
parties in the previous suit were the appellant's mother and sister- Whether
plea ofres judicata is available. |
14 September 2001 |
|
Appellant's 1991 land suit was time-barred; Limitation Act s.16 misapplied and constitutional rights cannot be relied on retrospectively.
Limitation law – applicability of the Limitation Act to customary-law proceedings – s.50 Limitation Act excludes Act (save s.43) from customary proceedings – Customary Law (Limitation of Proceedings) Rules, 1963 govern such proceedings. Limitation – disability under s.16 Law of Limitation Act – necessity of adducing evidence at trial; petition statements are not evidence. Limitation – non-judicial protests do not suspend limitation but may bear on extension under the Rules. Constitutional law – non-retrospectivity of later-enacted basic human rights in challenging 1974 confiscations.
|
14 September 2001 |
|
Reported
An appellant not party to earlier suit may be bound as a privy where a common interest existed, making later suit res judicata.
Civil procedure – res judicata – section 9 and Explanation VI – privies and persons claiming under litigants with common interest; multiplicity of suits and abuse of process; compensation issue previously decided.
|
14 September 2001 |
|
Employer not vicariously liable for employee's deliberate act outside the course of employment.
Vicarious liability – course of employment – distinction between negligent accident and deliberate act; proof of collusion – inadequate where only acquaintance and brief conversation shown; employer not liable for intentional wrongful acts outside scope of duties.
|
14 September 2001 |
|
Reported
Conviction quashed where courts failed to consider uncalled alibi witness whose potential evidence raised reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Right to call witnesses – Alibi evidence – Prior notice of alibi – Appellate review where trial or appellate court fails to consider potential uncalled witness evidence – Conviction quashed for unresolved doubt.
|
14 September 2001 |
|
Reported
Appeals - Appeal to the Court of Appeal - Notice of Appeal - Whether Notice
of Appeal filed in the sub registry of the Court of Appeal and signed on
behalf of Deputy Registrar of the Court of Appeal is valid.
Appeals - Appeals to the Court of Appeal — Notice of Appeal — Filing of the
Notice of Appeal - Notice of Appeal to be filed in the High Court — Rule
76(1) of the Court of Appeal Rules 1979.
Court of Appeal - Court of Appeal Rules - Notice of Appeal - Form of the
Notice of Appeal - Notice of Appeal to be in Form in the first Schedule
to the Court of Appeal Rules - Rule 76(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules
1979. |
14 September 2001 |
|
Reported
Conviction quashed where money was paid for a house, not in reliance on alleged money-multiplying pretence.
Criminal law – Obtaining money by false pretences – Whether the alleged false representation induced the victim to part with money; Misdescription of the inducing representation renders the charge misconceived; Conviction quashed where pleaded pretence did not cause the payment.
|
13 September 2001 |
|
Leave to appeal denied; substituted service was properly proved and ex-parte judgment not shown to be vitiated.
Civil procedure – application for leave to appeal – substituted service – affidavit of service – sufficiency of proof and effect of applicant's non-attendance; Evidence – allegation of judgement based on hearsay – requirement to show prejudice or vitiation of judgment; Court of Appeal Rules – requirement to seek leave from High Court under Rule 44 and to attach drawn order under Rule 46(3).
|
13 September 2001 |
|
Leave to appeal denied where substituted service was proved and ex‑parte decree was properly entered.
Civil procedure – substituted service – sufficiency of affidavit of service – ex‑parte proceedings justified by repeated non‑attendance. Evidence – hearsay – whether judgment was founded on inadmissible hearsay. Court of Appeal Rules – requirements as to mode of application, attachment of drawn High Court order (Rule 46(3)), and seeking prior leave from High Court (Rule 44).
|
13 September 2001 |
(From the judgment ofthe High Court ofTanzania at Moshi, Mchome, J. dated 3 November 1999, in CriminalAppeal No. 73 of 1994) Criminal Law - Charge - Obtaining money by false pretence - Charge alleges obtaining money byfalsely claiming to be able to multiply it but complainant parted with the money to purchase a house - Whether the charge has a basis. |
13 September 2001 |
| February 2001 |
|
|
Appellate court upheld murder conviction and death sentence; provocation and insanity defences rejected, malice proven.
Criminal law – murder – provocation – cumulative/remote quarrels not sufficient; provocation requires sudden heat of passion without cooling time; Credibility – appellate deference to trial judge and assessors who saw and heard eyewitnesses; Insanity – not pleaded at trial, medical report of sanity, afterthought on appeal; Malice aforethought – multiple severe wounds and hostile utterances demonstrate express malice.
|
12 February 2001 |
|
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's challenge to the High Court conviction and sentence; no reasons appear in the record.
Criminal appeal — appeal against High Court conviction and sentence — Court of Appeal disposition: appeal dismissed — reasons not included in provided record.
|
12 February 2001 |