|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 1996 |
|
|
Form defects in an application for leave to appeal out of time (title and oath placement) are curable by amendment; objection dismissed.
Practice and procedure — Appellate procedure — Application for leave to appeal out of time — Form irregularities (title as Notice of Motion; placement of oath/affirmation) are curable by amendment and not fatal — Affidavit content — source of deponent’s belief — requirement to disclose only where external source exists.
|
30 December 1996 |
Appeal - Application to lodge memorandum of appeal out of time - Requirements. |
30 December 1996 |
|
Leave to appeal and extension granted due to court’s failure to supply judgment copy; raises suo motu enlargement issue.
Civil procedure – extension of time to apply for leave to appeal – delay caused by court’s failure to supply judgment copy – sufficiency of uncontroverted affidavit – leave granted. Procedural law – whether a court may enlarge limitation periods suo motu without an application – question reserved for appellate determination.
|
12 December 1996 |
|
Reported
Court of Appeal Rules - Record of Appeal not incorporating an extract of the order appealed against - Whether appeal is competent - Rule 89 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 1979. |
2 December 1996 |
| November 1996 |
|
|
Court reversed an extension of time where no new grounds justified overriding earlier finding that the appeal was time-barred.
* Civil procedure – extension of time – whether sufficient/new reasons exist to justify extension where matter previously considered and appeal found time-barred; application of Rule 83 of the Court of Appeal Rules.
* Procedural finality – repetition of previously decided issues does not warrant reconsideration absent new material.
|
28 November 1996 |
|
No extension of time where no sufficient new grounds existed and appeal was previously held time-barred.
Extension of time – discretion to extend time under Court of Appeal Rules (Rule 83) – whether sufficient/new grounds exist – prior determination of time-barred appeal – procedural chronology not amounting to fresh grounds.
|
28 November 1996 |
|
Application for a full bench to displace precedent denied; failure to supply address for service does not automatically extinguish locus standi.
Court of Appeal – procedure – requirement for respondent to supply an address for service – failure to provide address for service – locus standi – effect of prior decision (Mvita Construction) – whether full bench required to depart from precedent.
|
27 November 1996 |
|
Whether respondents holding a life licence to collect rents can be landlords entitled to evict the tenant.
* Property law – licence coupled with an interest – life right to collect rents – whether licence confers entitlement to possession and landlord status.
* Rent Restriction Act – definition of ‘landlord’ – person entitled to possession includes life licensee.
* Nationalised property – presidential directions – conditions on enjoyment of rents and consultation with NHC.
* Eviction – who may sue – licensee with life interest can seek eviction as landlord.
|
14 November 1996 |
(Appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Tanzania, Dar es Salaam, Mwaikusa J.) |
14 November 1996 |
| October 1996 |
|
|
Application to amend unverified affidavit and extend time dismissed for lack of leave, service and timeliness.
* Civil procedure – Affidavit verification – Effect of unverified affidavit on Notice of Motion; * Civil procedure – Amendment of pleadings/Notices – Requirement for leave to amend; * Civil procedure – Service of process – Non-service of original Notice; * Civil procedure – Timeliness – Rule 47 and extension of time; * Relief – Application to extend time and amend dismissed with costs.
|
25 October 1996 |
|
Reported
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Appeals to the Court of Appeal - Appeals originating from primary courts-Need for Certificate that appeal involves a point of law - Time frame in which to apply for the certificate - Section 5 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1979 |
10 October 1996 |
|
Appeals in election petition matters lie to the Court of Appeal as of right; alleged corrupt agents must be handled under Elections Act procedure.
Constitutional and appellate jurisdiction — Appeals from High Court election petitions lie to the Court of Appeal as of right; leave unnecessary. Elections law — Allegations that persons acted as corrupt agents cannot be resolved by ordinary joinder; Elections Act and petition rules govern procedure and require opportunity to be heard. Civil procedure — Objection of non-joinder should be taken at earliest opportunity; substantive statutory procedure prevails.
|
8 October 1996 |
| September 1996 |
|
|
Application to extend time to add costs to judgment struck out as abuse of process and incompetent.
Civil procedure — application for extension of time to correct judgment — correction to include costs where no prayer was made in memorandum of appeal — application time-barred — repeat applications and re-litigation — abuse of process — application struck out as grossly misconceived and incompetent.
|
24 September 1996 |
|
Reported
Evidence — Presumptions — Entries in bankers’ books — Effect of s 77of Evidence Act 1967.
Banking - Negligence by banker - What constitutes - Failure to act on instructions of customer where court order hadfrozen account.
Banking - Effect of court order on deposit account. |
23 September 1996 |
|
Whether a Minister may lawfully qualify reinstatement by treating the pre-decision period as leave without pay.
Employment law – Reinstatement – Whether a Minister may qualify reinstatement by treating pre-decision period as leave without pay – Scope of Ministerial power under section 9B of the Industrial Court of Tanzania Act – Judicial review and reasonableness of administrative decisions.
|
23 September 1996 |
| August 1996 |
|
|
Court dismissed preliminary objection to counter-affidavit and ordered substantive application for extension and stay to proceed to hearing.
* Civil procedure – Preliminary objection – striking out counter-affidavit – test for argumentative, evasive or incurably defective affidavits; * Civil procedure – Counter-affidavit may clarify subject matter and raise legal points; * Evidence – statements attributable to court officers should be sworn by those officers; * Procedure – matters of conflicting affidavits to be resolved at substantive hearing.
|
7 August 1996 |
| July 1996 |
|
|
Interlocutory review refused as res judicata; application struck out and personal costs ordered against counsel.
Court of Appeal procedure — interlocutory applications — preliminary objections to applications — rule 100 inapplicable to applications; rule 3 governs procedure — res judicata of Full Bench rulings — one panel cannot intervene in another panel’s proceedings — rule 116: personal costs against advocate for improper or fruitless proceedings.
|
30 July 1996 |
|
Reported
Interlocutory review seeking to affect an already-heard appeal was incompetent and the application was struck out with personal costs against counsel.
Court of Appeal procedure – interlocutory applications – competency where the affected appeal has been heard; Preliminary objection – Rule 100 applies to appeals only; preliminary objections to applications governed by general rules and must be raised before hearing; Bench jurisdiction – one bench cannot intervene in proceedings before another bench; Costs – Rule 116 permits personal costs against advocate for improperly or unreasonably incurred costs.
|
30 July 1996 |
|
Reported
Civil Practice and Procedure - Interlocutory Proceedings - Meaning of interlocutory proceeding - "Interlocutory proceedings defined"
Civil Practice and Procedure - Preliminary Objection - Preliminary Objections under the Court of AppealRules - Preliminary Objections to Applications - Rule 100 not applicable. |
30 July 1996 |
|
Review application dismissed: alleged errors were appellate issues, not grounds for review; no apparent error on record.
Civil procedure – Review jurisdiction; limits of review versus appeal; apparent error on the face of the record; impounding unstamped documents and stamp duty issues; remedies for alleged unjust enrichment.
|
23 July 1996 |
|
Court dismissed preliminary objection and extended time to annex High Court ruling, invoking Rule 3(1) in the interests of justice.
Civil procedure — Rule 46(3) (mandatory annexure of High Court decision); Rule 3(1) (court may depart from Rules in interest of justice); lay litigant’s inability to obtain certified copies or counsel may justify extension of time; preliminary objection dismissed and time extended to cure defect.
|
15 July 1996 |
|
An application for revision was incompetent where no exceptional circumstances justified bypassing the appeal process.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Revisional jurisdiction – Limited circumstances for its exercise as set out in Halais Pro‑Chemie – Revision not to be used as an alternative to appeal. * Civil procedure – Preliminary objection – Competence of application to invoke revision. * Exceptional circumstances – Complaint about judicial error and counsel’s departure not sufficient to invoke revision.
|
11 July 1996 |
| June 1996 |
|
|
Taxing officer allowed substantial but reduced instruction fee; bill of costs taxed at Shs.8,044,000.
Taxation of costs – instruction fees – reasonableness and proportionality in complex appeals – considerations: record length, authorities, hearing duration, post-judgment work – reduction of excessive claim.
|
28 June 1996 |
|
Court ordered the Registrar to re‑process registration fairly and allowed provisional political participation; no automatic issuance or damages.
Political Parties Act s.20(1) — finality of Registrar’s decisions; judicial review only; interpretation of appellate order as duty to re‑process application fairly; provisional registration preserved; no automatic grant or general power to compel issuance but Court directed Registrar to decide within four weeks; claim for damages dismissed.
|
14 June 1996 |
|
Court held that election petition particulars must be specifically pleaded and directed amendment rather than summary dismissal.
Election law – Election petitions – Pleadings – Particularity of allegations – material facts must be specifically pleaded; facts cannot be implied. Civil Procedure – Order VI Rules 5 and 16 – power to order further particulars or amendment; courts should prescribe time limits to avoid delay. Elections (Elections Petitions) Rules, Rule 27(1) – dismissal for procedural non‑compliance only where miscarriage of justice likely. Striking out pleadings may amount to dismissal where petition depends on cumulative allegations.
|
10 June 1996 |
|
Reported
Elections - Election petition - Pleadings - Not correct to infer a fact which is not specifically pleaded in petition - Pleadings vague and imprecise
Elections - Election petition - Parts ofpetition found to be vague and imprecise - Orderfor amendment would not have resulted in delay if court prescribed specific period within which amendments were to be effected - In circumstances, orderfor amendment ought to have been granted
Civil Practice and Procedure - Pleadings - Amendments to - When amendments should be granted - Law restated |
10 June 1996 |
| May 1996 |
|
|
Reported
Criminal Law - Murder - Defence ofInsanity - Medical evidence of insanity - Utility ofdoctor's evidence of insanity
Criminal Law -Insanity - Test ofthe defence of insanity
Criminal Law - Murder - Diminished responsibility - Whether diminished responsibility is recognized as a defence under the law of Tanzania |
30 May 1996 |
|
An order made in execution proceedings is not a decree appealable as of right; leave to appeal is required.
Civil procedure — execution proceedings — whether an order made in execution proceedings is a 'decree' appealable as of right — interpretation of section 3 and section 38 Civil Procedure Code and section 5(1)(a)/(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act — leave to appeal required for 'every other decree'.
|
30 May 1996 |
|
Whether a High Court decree issued in execution proceedings is appealable as of right or requires leave.
Appellate jurisdiction – Appeal as of right v leave – Whether decree made in execution proceedings is a decree made in exercise of High Court's original jurisdiction under s.5(1)(a) or falls under s.5(1)(c) requiring leave; Civil Procedure Code – definition of 'decree' and whether execution proceedings amount to a 'suit' for that purpose; Procedural competence – preliminary objection and striking out for want of leave/prosecution.
|
30 May 1996 |
|
|
30 May 1996 |
|
Application to set aside High Court refusal of leave to appeal dismissed as time‑barred and without merit.
* Civil Procedure – Appeals – Rule 43(a) time limit for filing application for leave to appeal – extension of time – failure to apply for extension renders application time‑barred. * Appellate procedure – Applications for leave refused by High Court should be made to a single judge of the Court of Appeal. * Procedural law – Ignorance of court rules is no defence. * Matrimonial property – High Court’s declaration of house as matrimonial did not deprive either spouse of a share.
|
24 May 1996 |
|
Respondent’s failure to institute appeal within 60 days and to comply with Rule 83(1) warrants striking out the notice of appeal.
* Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules, Rule 83(1) and (2) – Notice of appeal – mandatory requirement to institute appeal within 60 days – obligation to send copy of request for proceedings to opposing party – failure to comply bars reliance on non‑receipt of record – ignorance of law not a defence.
|
17 May 1996 |
|
Non‑compliance with Rule 89 is not automatically fatal; court allowed filing of a supplementary record and the appeal to proceed.
Court of Appeal Rules – Rule 89 – Requirement to include material exhibits and complete record – Non‑compliance with rule does not automatically invalidate appeal – Court’s discretion to allow supplementary record in interests of justice.
|
15 May 1996 |
|
Appeal from a High Court judgment is of right; application to extend time for leave was misconceived and dismissed, but Court allowed departure to file extension to file notice of appeal in this Court.
* Appellate jurisdiction – appeal from High Court judgment and decree is an appeal as of right; leave to appeal not required.
* Procedure – extension of time to seek leave to appeal: misconceived where leave unnecessary.
* Civil procedure – applications ordinarily to be filed first in High Court under s.11 and Rules of Court; Court may depart under Rule 3(1)(2).
* Court discretion – departure justified where High Court record misplaced and delay would cause prejudice.
* Costs – party who files incorrect papers which mislead the court may be ordered to pay costs.
|
7 May 1996 |
|
Where an appeal lies as of right no leave is needed; Court may depart from Rule 44 in appropriate circumstances.
Civil procedure — extension of time — application for leave to appeal unnecessary where appeal lies as of right; Rule 44 (file first in High Court) — Court may depart under Rule 3(1)(2) where justified; costs for misleading or incorrect filings.
|
7 May 1996 |
| April 1996 |
|
|
Reported
Contract - Fraud - Effect - Judgment obtained on Itasis of fraud by one of the parties - Decision set aside on appeal |
17 April 1996 |
|
Interlocutory relief requires a prima facie case and preservation of the status quo, not trying substantive infringement issues.
Trade mark law - interlocutory injunctions - preservation of status quo; prima facie case and probability of success; irreparable harm; improper trial of substantive issues at interlocutory stage; passing-off.
|
15 April 1996 |
|
Application to review the Court’s judgment under s.4(2) was incompetent and dismissed; inherent jurisdiction not established.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – scope limited to matters incidental to hearing and determination of appeals; cannot be invoked after final determination. * Inherent jurisdiction – Court’s power to review its own decisions only in exceptional cases (manifest error on face of record, fraud, denial of hearing). * Procedure – new issues, cross-appeal and participation in auction as proper remedies.
|
15 April 1996 |
|
Section 4(2) AJA cannot be used to review a final appeal; inherent jurisdiction is narrowly confined.
* Appellate procedure – Section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – powers of revision limited to matters incidental to hearing and determination of an appeal.
* Inherent jurisdiction – Court of Appeal’s power to review its own decisions – confined to exceptional cases (manifest error on the face of record, fraud or denial of hearing).
* Procedure – New issues and facts not raised in pleadings cannot be advanced to reopen a final appellate judgment.
* Remedies – Alleged low sale price or pending related proceedings do not, without more, justify review; cross-appeal or other remedies appropriate.
|
15 April 1996 |
|
Court orders valuation and equal division of the matrimonial house, recognizing domestic work as a joint contribution.
Family law – Divorce – Division of matrimonial property under section 114 Law of Marriage Act – "Joint efforts" includes domestic work and non‑monetary contributions – Valuation and equal division or sale of matrimonial house; Custody – welfare of child and consideration of older children's wishes (s.125(2)(b)).
|
15 April 1996 |
| March 1996 |
|
|
Applicant failed to show special circumstances; security deposit alone and unproven poverty do not justify stay of execution.
Stay of execution – Rule 9(2)(b) – special circumstances required – security deposit not automatically sufficient – poverty must be proved strictly – declaratory orders not executable; stay ineffectual.
|
11 March 1996 |
|
Whether time should be extended to file a record of appeal where a timely notice was lodged but leave to appeal remained pending.
Court of Appeal — extension of time under Rule 8 — where notice of appeal lodged timely but leave pending; applicant’s diligence; court vacation/backlog as sufficient cause; discretionary extension until leave obtained; record to be filed within ten days of leave.
|
11 March 1996 |
| February 1996 |
|
|
By consent the appeal was allowed, remitted for rehearing, no costs ordered, and security deposit refunded.
Appeal by consent — Appeal allowed and matter remitted to High Court for hearing; no order as to costs; refund of security deposit for appeal costs.
|
25 February 1996 |
|
Section 59 does not govern jointly owned matrimonial homes; a fraudulent secret sale is void and title did not pass.
Property law – Matrimonial home – Section 59 Law of Marriage Act limited to sole ownership cases; jointly owned matrimonial homes governed by ordinary transfer rules; sale secretly negotiated with purchaser aware of joint ownership constitutes fraud and is void; Commissioner’s consent obtained by misrepresentation cannot validate an invalid transfer; relief: restoration of register and restitution remedies.
|
23 February 1996 |
|
Sale of jointly owned matrimonial home is void where purchaser knew of joint ownership and consent was obtained by misrepresentation.
Property law – Matrimonial home – Construction of s.59 Law of Marriage Act: applies where one spouse solely owns the home; not to jointly owned homes – Sale by one joint-owner without consent – secret sale and purchaser’s knowledge amounts to fraud – consent by Commissioner obtained by misrepresentation void – transaction null; title not transferred.
|
23 February 1996 |
|
Applicant granted extension to file record where delay resulted from awaiting leave to appeal and court vacation.
Civil procedure – extension of time under Rule 8 – delay caused by awaiting leave to appeal, court vacation and High Court backlog – sufficient cause for extension where applicant took necessary steps.
|
11 February 1996 |
| January 1996 |
|
|
|
1 January 1996 |
|
|
1 January 1996 |
|
|
1 January 1996 |
|
Court upholds respondent’s citizenship and locus standi; registration valid under existing citizenship laws.
* Constitutional and statutory interpretation – citizenship laws – whether Citizenship Ordinance and Citizenship Act, 1961 were repealed.* Administrative law – validity of registration certificates – ministerial authorization versus personal signature requirement.* Electoral law – locus standi to present election petitions – meaning of "alleges to have been a candidate" under s.111(c) of the Elections Act, 1985.* Interpretation of "ordinarily resident" in citizenship context.
|
1 January 1996 |