Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

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.
Visit website
https://jmap.judiciary.go.tz/jmap/jmap-coa
14 judgments
Advanced search

Court registries

All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Outcomes
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
14 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
October 2006
Paul Martin vs Bertha Anderson (Civil Application No. 7 of 2005) [2006] TZCA 241 (17 October 2006)
A four-year delay due to applicant's negligence does not justify extension of time to apply for leave.
Extension of time — whether sufficient reason under Rule 8 for extension to apply for leave to appeal out of time; Negligence/inadvertence by applicant or counsel — not sufficient; Inordinate delay (over four years) — ground for dismissal; Rule 43(b) — 14-day limit after High Court refusal.
 17 October 2006
Sisal Kamba Spinning Company Ltd vs Tpm (1998) Limited (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2004) [2006] TZCA 13 (13 October 2006)
Vendor's failure to tender all contracted property bars recovery of the outstanding purchase price and specific performance.
Contract law — Sale of land and assets — Obligation to tender all contracted property; "as is where is" clause does not excuse non-existent or non-delivered contractual items; specific performance inappropriate where vendor has not performed.
 13 October 2006
Deogratius Godwin vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 107 of 2005) [2006] TZCA 142 (4 October 2006)
Appellant’s conviction quashed where visual identification was unreliable and he was omitted from the identification parade.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at night – Conditions affecting reliability; omission to include accused in identification parade undermines evidentiary weight. Criminal law – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Suspicion insufficient for conviction. Procedure – Identification parade – failure to present accused prejudicial.
 4 October 2006
Deogratius Godwin vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 107 of 2005) [2006] TZCA 242 (4 October 2006)
Conviction quashed where nighttime visual identification was unreliable and reasonable doubt remained.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at night – Reliability and conditions required (Waziri Amani standard); Identification parade – failure to produce accused weakens prosecution case; Corroboration – unidentifying witnesses do not supply necessary corroboration; Reasonable doubt – suspicion insufficient for conviction.
 4 October 2006
Elisamia Onesmo vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 160 of 2003) [2006] TZCA 224 (4 October 2006)
Failure to inform the appellant of s214 C.P.A. rights vitiated the trial; proceedings quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — Section 214 C.P.A. — Successor magistrate’s duty to inform accused of right to recall witnesses — Non‑compliance fatal where credibility hinges on demeanour; conviction unsafe; retrial ordered.
 4 October 2006
Elisante Simon @ Kilinganya vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 154 of 2003) [2006] TZCA 226 (4 October 2006)
An oral dying declaration corroborated by eyewitness and post-mortem upheld the murder conviction and death sentence.
Criminal law – dying declaration under s.34(a) Evidence Act – oral statements admissible; dying declarations require corroboration; corroboration by eyewitness identification and post-mortem; credibility and identification where witness knew accused prior to incident.
 4 October 2006
Frank Jonathan Mushi vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 171 of 2003) [2006] TZCA 223 (4 October 2006)
Conviction for forcible entry quashed where violent entry was unproved, witness testimony uncorroborated and delays unexplained.
Criminal law – forcible entry (s.85 Penal Code) – requirement of violent entry – proof beyond reasonable doubt; single-witness testimony and need for corroboration; unexplained delay in reporting/arrest undermining prosecution case; irregularities in execution sale affecting credibility of related criminal charge.
 4 October 2006
Honorath John Lyimo vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 2003) [2006] TZCA 182 (4 October 2006)
Withdrawal under section 98 does not bar later prosecution; conviction upheld on identification, exhibits and caution statement.
Criminal law – armed robbery; identification evidence and exhibits recovered from robbed vehicle; admissibility and corroborative value of caution statements; autrefois acquit – effect of withdrawal under section 98 Criminal Procedure Act; second appeal limited to points of law unless misdirection on evidence.
 4 October 2006
khamisi Ramadhani @ Rupindira vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 157 of 2003) [2006] TZCA 157 (4 October 2006)
Non‑compliance with s.192 and absence of s.256A transfer made the preliminary hearing and conviction void; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — Preliminary hearing under s.192 CPA — Mandatory requirements — Non‑compliance vitiates proceedings; Transfer under s.256A required for magistrate with extended jurisdiction to conduct plea/trial; jurisdictional defect renders proceedings null; retrial ordered.
 4 October 2006
Khamisi Ramadhani @ Rupindira vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 157 of 2003) [2006] TZCA 183 (4 October 2006)
Lack of a s256A transfer rendered the preliminary hearing void, vitiating proceedings and prompting quash of conviction and retrial.
Criminal procedure — Sections 192 and 256A Criminal Procedure Act — transfer to magistrate exercising extended jurisdiction — jurisdictional defect — preliminary hearing nullity — non-compliance with mandatory procedure vitiates proceedings — conviction quashed and retrial ordered.
 4 October 2006
Kweka & Another vs Ngorika Bus Services & Transport Company Limited (Civil Appeal 129 of 2002) [2006] TZCA 10 (4 October 2006)
An order setting aside an ex parte decree under Order IX, r.13 C.P.C. is not appealable; the appeal was struck out with costs.
Civil procedure — Order IX, r.13 C.P.C. — setting aside ex parte decree — non-appealable; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.5(1) subject to other written law; appeal competence; procedural requirement — judge-signed leave order (rule 89(1)(i) Rules of the Court).
 4 October 2006
Ramadhani Mtinda vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 89 of 2004) [2006] TZCA 222 (4 October 2006)
An appeal from a Primary Court without the High Court’s certificate on a point of law is incompetent and is struck out.
Appeals from Primary Courts — third appeals to the Court of Appeal — mandatory High Court certificate that a point of law is involved (Appellate Jurisdiction Act / Part III(c) Magistrates' Courts Act) — absence of certificate renders appeal incompetent — appeal struck out; leave to apply for extension and certificate to reinstitute appeal out of time.
 4 October 2006
Richard Temba Alias Gerald Mchomba vs Oacar T. Temba (Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2005) [2006] TZCA 361 (4 October 2006)
An appeal is incompetent where the record contains a decree not validly signed by the trial judge or his successor.
Civil procedure — Decree — Order XX rule 7 requires trial judge/magistrate to sign decree — Order XX rule 8 allows successor judge to sign if original judge vacated office — Registrar lacks power to sign decree — Rule 89(1)(h) requires decree in record of appeal — Invalid decree renders appeal incompetent.
 4 October 2006
Zakaria Japhet @ Jumanne & Others vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2003) [2006] TZCA 150 (4 October 2006)
Appellants’ convictions quashed: unreliable night identification and lack of causation precluded application of common intention.
Criminal law – Identification evidence at night – need to exclude all possibilities of mistaken identity; Caution in reliance on generalized testimony. Causation – post-mortem showing head injury inconsistent with alleged assaults to non-fatal parts; inability to link accused’s acts to death. Common intention – requires proper identification and causation. Acquittal where lingering doubts remain.
 4 October 2006