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.
16 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Outcomes
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
16 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
November 2023
Denial of cross‑examination of one witness warrants expungement of that evidence, not automatic nullification of the entire trial.
Criminal procedure – preliminary hearing (s.192 CPA) – non‑compliance curable where accused represented; Evidence – right to cross‑examination (s.147 Evidence Act) – failure may require expungement of affected testimony; Substitution of offences (s.300 CPA) – cannot substitute to non‑cognate/equally serious offence; Appellate review – reassessment after expungement; Consent to prosecute – Regulations apply only to listed specified offences.
17 November 2023
A review succeeds only for obvious, patent errors on the face of the record, not for re-evaluation of evidence.
Criminal law – Review of Court of Appeal decision – Scope of review limited to manifest error on the face of the record, fraud, or denial of hearing; manifest error must be obvious and patent; disagreement with evaluation of evidence is not a ground for review; review cannot be used as an appeal in disguise.
16 November 2023
Stay of execution granted pending appeal where substantial decretal sum risked rendering appeal nugatory, subject to bank guarantee.
Civil procedure – stay of execution pending appeal – Rule 11 Court of Appeal Rules: notice of appeal, timely application, undertaking to furnish security, and irreparable loss; balancing decree-holder’s interest and appellant’s right to appeal; conditional stay by bank guarantee.
16 November 2023
Applicant’s complaints required re‑evaluation of evidence and thus amounted to an appeal, so review application was dismissed.
Procedure — Review of Court of Appeal judgment — Rule 66(1) ACR — manifest error on face of record must be obvious; appeal in disguise not reviewable; jurisdictional complaints distinct from dissatisfaction with findings. Evidence — Allegation of fresh evidence on appeal — requires demonstration, otherwise matter for appeal. Affidavit practice — deponent affirming on behalf of another without power of attorney may be allowed if no prejudice and overriding objective applies. Land law — co-ownership dispute and evaluation of title and transfer deed issues involved but not determinative on review.
15 November 2023
Notice of Appeal struck out for failure by the respondents to take required steps under rule 90(5) of the Rules.
Court of Appeal — Civil procedure — Striking out Notice of Appeal under rule 89(2) — Duty of intending appellant under rule 90(5) to follow up Registrar for appeal records — 2019 amendment displaces “home and dry” rule — Prolonged inaction justifies striking out.
15 November 2023
Applicant's delay not excused: financial hardship and vague alleged illegalities insufficient to justify extension of time.
Civil procedure — Extension of time — Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules — Applicant must show good cause: account for entire delay, demonstrate diligence, and explain any point of law of sufficient importance (Lyamuya guidelines). Financial hardship — Generally not sufficient ground for extension absent exceptional circumstances. Illegality — Alleged irregularities must be apparent on the face of the record or clearly pleaded and elaborated to justify enlargement of time. Lack of diligence/negligence — Militates against granting extension.
14 November 2023
Review limited to patent errors in the Court’s own judgment; applicant’s factual/procedural complaints were misplaced.
Review — scope of review under rule 66(1): limited to the Court's judgment or order; not a rehearing or appeal; manifest error on the face of the record; allegations of nullity, fraud or perjury require substantiation; labour dispute — no costs order.
14 November 2023
An application for stay of execution filed outside the 14-day period under rule 11(4) is time barred and non-justiciable.
Civil procedure — Stay of execution — Rule 11(4) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules — 14-day time limit from service of notice of execution or awareness of execution proceedings — computation of time; Jurisdiction — Time limitation goes to jurisdiction — Court cannot hear time-barred stay application; Procedure — Preliminary objection on time bar; Labour law — no costs order in labour matters.
13 November 2023
Applicants granted extension to appeal after court found prior procedural setbacks and law change constituted sufficient cause.
Civil procedure — Extension of time — Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules 2009 — Good cause required — consideration of technical delay and prior defective or struck-out applications. Civil procedure — Accounting for delay — requirement to explain each day, but technical delay and subsequent supply of ruling may justify short unexplained intervals. Appeals — Change of law removing leave requirement — effect on pending attempts to obtain leave.
13 November 2023
10 November 2023
Applicant granted stay of execution pending appeal, conditional on deposit of a bank guarantee for the decretal amount.
Civil procedure — Stay of execution — Rule 11 Court of Appeal Rules 2009 — timeliness under rule 11(4); conditions under rule 11(5) (substantial loss and security); compliance with rule 11(7) documentary requirements; bank guarantee as appropriate security.
8 November 2023
Applicant failed to show an obvious manifest error on the face of the record; review dismissed as appeal in disguise.
Civil procedure — Review jurisdiction — Rule 66(1)(a) — Manifest error on the face of the record — narrow residual power. Evidence/admissibility — Reliance on annexure allegedly not tendered — re‑assessment of evidence not permissible in review. Probate/administration — Revocation of administrator’s appointment — distinction between revocation before closure and after discharge/inventory. Procedural law — Review should not be used as an appeal in disguise; mere disagreement with merits is not reviewable.
8 November 2023
Review denied: alleged failure to address bonafide purchaser and reliance on non‑record document did not show manifest error.
Appellate review — inherent power to review decision — limited by rule 66 and requires manifest error on face of record; review not for re‑evaluation of evidence or raising new issues; documents not admitted in evidence cannot be relied upon; distinction from cases where an extraneous exhibit vitiated judgment.
8 November 2023
A notice of appeal was struck out for failure to take essential steps to prosecute the appeal under Rule 89(2).
Civil procedure — Appeal procedure — Notice of appeal — Striking out for failure to take essential steps to prosecute appeal — Rule 89(2) Court of Appeal Rules. Labour law — procedural relief — no order as to costs in labour matters.
8 November 2023
Second-bite leave granted; time under Rule 45(b) runs from Registrar’s certificate and jurisdictional issue merits appeal.
Civil procedure — Leave to appeal (second bite) — Computation of fourteen-day period under Rule 45(b) — Role and certificate of Registrar excluding time for preparation — Rule 90(1) guidance on excluded period — Jurisdictional point of law (territorial jurisdiction) may be raised at leave stage.
7 November 2023
Failure to record parties' choice on assessors in a land trial renders proceedings null and mandates an expedited retrial.
Land law – High Court Registries Rules 1984 (as amended by G.N. Nos. 63/2001 and 364/2005) – requirement for Judge to sit with two assessors in land disputes unless parties agree otherwise – necessity to record parties' choice and names of assessors – failure to record renders proceedings a nullity – retrial ordered.
3 November 2023