|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2002 |
|
|
Court allowed informal amendment substituting correct respondent and granted stay of execution pending appeal.
Civil procedure — Appeal — Correction of misnamed respondent by informal amendment — Rule 45(3)(a) and Rule 3(2)(b) — Amendment not a new notice of appeal; limitation inapplicable — Rule 79(1) duty to furnish address for service — Stay of execution granted.
|
31 December 2002 |
|
Limitation under the Tanzania Harbours Authority Act ran from transfer of the goods, rendering the claim time‑barred.
* Limitation – Tanzania Harbours Authority Act – 12‑month period – accrual when goods placed in possession/ custody of authority or third party. * Procedural law – preliminary objection on limitation may be taken even if earlier abandoned. * Notice – publication in local newspaper constitutes good notice; limited circulation not fatal. * Fraud – allegations of concealment in auction notice insufficient to toll limitation. * Joint defendants – statutory limitation defence available to all jointly and severally sued defendants.
|
18 December 2002 |
|
Conviction quashed where failure to conduct statutory voir dire and to inform accused of rights, combined with witness discrepancies, undermined the prosecution case.
Criminal law — defilement — admissibility and competence of child witness — voir dire/voice test under s127(2) Evidence Act; Criminal Procedure Act s240(3) — accused’s right to require medical examiner’s attendance and handling of PF3; credibility of prosecution witnesses and reasonable doubt; Court of Appeal Rules — protection of appellants in custody (Rule 68(1)).
|
17 December 2002 |
|
Court upholds interim preservation of funds but quashes stay where supporting affidavit was incurably defective and dismisses stay application.
Civil procedure – stay of execution – interim orders to preserve status quo – affidavit defects – hearsay, speculation, argument and defective verification – when affidavit is incurably defective and effect on interim orders and stay applications.
|
10 December 2002 |
|
Hearsay and speculative assertions in affidavits can render stay applications unsustainable and justify quashing interim orders.
Civil procedure – interim orders and stays of execution – affidavits in support of interlocutory applications – requirement that affidavits contain facts within deponent’s personal knowledge – hearsay and speculative allegations prejudicial and potentially incurably defective – discretion to allow amendment exercised judicially.
|
10 December 2002 |
|
Adjournment costs taxable only for appellant’s reasonable personal expenses on the adjournment day; family subsistence claims disallowed.
* Civil procedure — Costs — Taxation governed by Court of Appeal Rules (Rule 118(2)) and Third Schedule scales — Per diem subsistence rates as guide only where no receipts available. * Costs — Adjournment — Recoverable costs limited to reasonable personal expenses incurred in relation to the hearing; expenses of non-parties/dependants not allowable unless court ordered. * Distinction between adjournment costs and substantive claims for ongoing subsistence or repatriation.
|
5 December 2002 |
| November 2002 |
|
|
Applicant failed to satisfy stay-of-execution criteria and relied on an interlocutory injunction that had lapsed; application dismissed with costs.
• Civil procedure — Stay of execution — Applicant must show likelihood of success on appeal, risk of irreparable injury, and balance of convenience.
• Interlocutory injunctions — Order XXXVII (as amended by G.N. 508 of 1991) — validity for six months and requirement for lawful extension.
• Conflict between injunction and execution — lapsing of injunction removes basis for stay.
|
11 November 2002 |
| October 2002 |
|
|
Revision cannot substitute for appeal; no illegality or exceptional circumstance justified overturning refusal to stay for arbitration.
* Civil procedure — Revision — Limits of revisional jurisdiction — Non‑appellability under s.5(2)(d) Appellate Jurisdiction Act does not automatically permit revision — requirement of illegality, irregularity or exceptional circumstances.
* Arbitration — Stay of proceedings pending arbitration — filing a statement of defence may be treated as submission to court jurisdiction and abandonment of arbitration right (question of fact/discretion).
* Exceptional circumstances — prospective expense of foreign witnesses not a sufficient ground to invoke revisional jurisdiction.
|
30 October 2002 |
| September 2002 |
|
|
Default judgment requires proof of proper service; hearsay or defective affidavits cannot prove the claim.
Civil procedure – service of summons and default judgment – Order VIII r 1(1) and r 14(1); Affidavit evidence – admissibility, hearsay and statements of belief – Order XIX r 3(1); Proof on a balance of probabilities; Requirement to connect annexures/analyses to pleaded facts; Proof of special damages.
|
12 September 2002 |
|
Notice to an appellant takes effect on the appellant’s knowledge; payment/collection of proceedings starts the appeal period.
* Civil procedure – computation of time for instituting an appeal – notice by registrar takes effect on appellant’s knowledge/receipt; payment for and collection of proceedings may constitute awareness. * Court Rules (Rule 83(1)) – commencement of limitation period – practical evidence of notice. * Procedural objections – absence of original record does not necessarily prevent disposition of preliminary time-bar objections.
|
9 September 2002 |
|
Repeated, incompetent applications for stay of execution were struck out as abuse of process and lacking jurisdiction.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Competence where no Notice of Appeal served; multiplicity of applications and abuse of process; striking out incompetent applications; costs; resumption of High Court process.
|
3 September 2002 |
|
Reported
Limitation - Limitation of Time — Arbitration — Whether there is a period of limitation for a petition to set aside arbitration award — Section 21 of the Law of Limitation Act 1971, or Item 21 of Part III of the First A Schedule there to.
Arbitration — Awards - Petition to set aside an award - Whether such petition is a suit or an application - Section 15 of the Arbitration Ordinance Chapter 15, and rules 5 and 6 of the Arbitration Rules 1957.
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Matter not canvassed in the trial High Court - Whether competent to raise the matter on appeal. |
2 September 2002 |
| August 2002 |
|
|
|
28 August 2002 |
|
Whether prior valid appointments and a surviving-spouse will prevent a later Primary Court’s fresh appointment of an administrator.
* Probate and administration – appointment of administratrix – effect of revision orders – whether revision ordering rehearing revokes prior lawful appointment; * Probate – validity of appointment letters where original file lost; * Wills – surviving spouse’s rights under mutual will; * Administration – whether administrator must be an heir; * Civil procedure – improper appointment by a different primary court and consequences.
|
22 August 2002 |
|
Court finds service of notice and record of appeal sufficiently proved despite diary erasures; preliminary objection dismissed.
Civil procedure — Service of notice of appeal and record of appeal — Proof of service by affidavits and contemporaneous diary entries — Admissibility of late-filed affidavits — Ex parte application not determinative of service — Preliminary objection to strike out appeal dismissed.
|
22 August 2002 |
|
Preliminary objection for non‑service dismissed; court found service of notice and record of appeal proved and ordered appeal to proceed.
* Civil procedure – service of appeal documents – compliance with Rules 77(1) and 90(1) – proof of service by affidavit and contemporaneous diary entries. * Civil procedure – preliminary objection – striking out notice of appeal for failure to take essential steps – evidential sufficiency. * Procedural applications – ex parte application refusal does not of itself prove non-service.
|
22 August 2002 |
|
Appeal allowed: presence of General Manager did not prove unlawful bias or invalidate dismissal.
Employment law – dismissal for misconduct – alleged breach of natural justice by presence of General Manager at Board disciplinary meeting – appellate review of factual findings where trial judge relied on speculation – Board minutes and witness evidence as determinative of influence on decision-making.
|
21 August 2002 |
|
Respondent’s preliminary objection was unsustainable because it failed to cross‑appeal or obtain leave under section 5(2)(b).
Appellate procedure — preliminary objections — specified public corporations under receivership — requirement of leave under Bankruptcy Ordinance — effect of failure to cross‑appeal — section 5(2)(b) Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1979.
|
12 August 2002 |
| July 2002 |
|
|
Interim High Court orders pending arbitration lapse on a final arbitral award, rendering the subsequent appeal academic and struck out.
* Arbitration law – interplay between interim court orders and arbitration – interim court orders pending arbitration lapse upon final arbitral award.
* Civil procedure – competency of appeal – absence of a subsisting order renders an appeal academic and incompetent.
* Contract (PPA) – Article providing that interim relief subsists until tariff dispute resolution – effect of arbitral finality on interim judicial relief.
* Costs – costs follow the event; taxation to proceed by usual rules.
|
29 July 2002 |
|
A stay was granted to prevent sale of factory/machinery pending appeal where sale would cause irreparable injury and nullify the appeal.
Loans and Advances Recovery Trust Act – stay of execution – dismissal of petition – whether non-executable order can be stayed to prevent sale of real property/machinery – irreparable injury – appeal rendered nugatory.
|
25 July 2002 |
|
Application for stay dismissed; vehicles must remain with respondent pending final determination due to irregular release and misleading drawn order.
Stay of execution – whether execution lawfully effected; court broker’s irregular release of property; clarity between judge’s ruling and drawn order; requirement to attach lower court decision and sworn affidavits in stay applications; orders pending final determination.
|
11 July 2002 |
| June 2002 |
|
|
Stay of execution granted where attachment of hotel would cause irreparable harm, subject to deposit of title, caveat and policy deed.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Factors: irreparable injury, prospects of success, balance of convenience – Prospects of success often speculative – Stay granted where attachment of a commercial property would cause irreparable loss – Conditions: deposit of title deed, caveat and insurance policy deed.
|
26 June 2002 |
|
Will of an illiterate testator invalid where statutory requirement of two literate clan witnesses was not met.
Wills — Illiterate testator — Formal attestation requirements under GN No. 436 (Rule 19) — Need for at least four literate witnesses: two clan members and two independent non‑clan members — Non‑compliance renders purported will invalid.
|
24 June 2002 |
|
Court set aside premature ex parte judgment for bypassing mandatory mediation steps and remitted matter for continued ADR.
Civil procedure — Alternative Dispute Resolution (G.N. No. 422 of 1994) — Orders VIIIA and VIIIB — duty of judge to promote mediation; parties/advocates required to participate absent good cause; procedure after failed mediation — pre-trial settlement/scheduling conference and framing of issues before trial; improper ex parte proof and premature judgment set aside.
|
21 June 2002 |
| May 2002 |
|
Civil Practice and Procedure - Courts - Hierarchy of the Courts in Mainland Tanzania and Tanzania Zanzibar - [Mainland] Magistrates ’ Courts Act 1984 and [Zanzibar] Magistrates’ Courts Act 1985.
Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Appeals from the High Court to the Court of Appeal - Certificate on a point of law - When a certificate on a point of law is necessary - Rule 89(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules 1979, section 5(2)(c) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1979 and the Constitution A (Consequential, Transitional and Temporary Provisions) Act Number 16 of 1984.
Court of Appeal - Appeals - Appeals from the High Court to the Court of Appeal
- Certificate on a point of law - Purpose of requiring a certificate on a point of law - Conflicting decisions of the Court - Court of Appeal Rules 1979 _ The People's Courts Decree 1969. |
31 May 2002 |
|
Reported
An appeal from a Zanzibar district court requires High Court leave, not a High Court certificate on a point of law.
* Appellate jurisdiction – requirement of High Court certificate under s.5(2)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – construction after Act No.16 of 1984 extension to Zanzibar. * Court hierarchy – Mainland three-tier versus Zanzibar four-tier system and effects on 'third'/'fourth' appeal characterisation. * Court of Appeal Rules (Rule 89(2)) – applicability to Zanzibar appeals. * Interpretation – reading Mainland provisions to include corresponding Zanzibar enactments under s.3(2) of Act No.15/1979. |
31 May 2002 |
|
Credible circumstantial and identification evidence established murder beyond reasonable doubt; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Murder – circumstantial evidence and identification – requirement that circumstances exclude reasonable alternative hypotheses. * Evidence – assessment of witness credibility – domestic servants and household witnesses. * Defence – alibi – sufficiency and corroboration. * Expert evidence – post-mortem and toxicology – effect on causation. * Trial practice – direction to assessors and burden of proof.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
|
20 May 2002 |
| April 2002 |
|
|
Representative employment suits require court leave under Order 1 rule 8; pre‑judgment interest is commercial, post‑judgment 7%–12%.
Civil procedure – representative suits – Order 1 rule 8 CPC requires leave where one or more persons sue on behalf of others; leave safeguards existence and mandate of those represented. Employment law – proceedings from labour officer’s report (s.132/134 Employment Ordinance) – magistrate to apply substantial justice and dispense with technicalities, but representative‑suit leave remains relevant. Interest – pre‑judgment interest should be at commercial rate; post‑judgment interest governed by O.20 r.21 (7%–12%); costs generally follow the event.
|
22 April 2002 |
|
Leave under Order 1 rule 8(1)(a) is mandatory for representative employment suits under section 134; technicality proviso does not exempt it.
* Employment law – representative suits – Order 1 rule 8(1)(a) CPC – leave to sue on behalf of others applies to employment complaints under section 134 of the Employment Ordinance.
* Section 134 Employment Ordinance – proviso permitting disregard of technicalities does not permit dispensing with mandatory leave requirement for representative suits.
* Civil procedure – protection against proceedings on behalf of dead, non-existent or unauthorised persons – fundamental nature of leave requirement.
|
22 April 2002 |
|
Order 1 r.8(1)(a) leave requirement for representative suits applies to employment proceedings and is not a mere technicality.
Representative suits – Order 1 rule 8(1)(a) CPC – leave to sue required – Employment proceedings under s.134 Employment Ordinance – s.134(3) does not displace leave requirement – procedural technicalities vs substantive safeguards – protection against fictitious or unauthorised plaintiffs.
|
22 April 2002 |
|
Reported
Interlocutory High Court orders in election petitions are not appealable as of right under Article 83(14); leave is required.
Constitutional law – Article 83(14) – Appeal as of right in election petitions limited to final High Court determinations; interlocutory orders require leave; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.5(1) governs appeals where Article 83(14) does not apply. |
19 April 2002 |
|
Interlocutory High Court orders in election petitions are not appealable as of right under Article 83(4); leave is required.
Constitutional law – Article 83(4) – Appeals from High Court decisions in election petitions – limited to cases where High Court has finally determined matter; interlocutory orders not appealable as of right. Appellate procedure – Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.5(1) – governs appeals from interlocutory orders; leave required. Precedent – earlier wide interpretation of Article 83(4) qualified on facts.
|
19 April 2002 |
|
Stay granted pending appeal because High Court relied on unsworn oral allegations and applicant risked irreparable harm.
Companies — Winding‑up proceedings — interim orders — deposit of capacity charges into court; Civil procedure — interlocutory stay pending appeal — prima facie prospects of success and balance of convenience; Evidence — oral allegations from the bar versus affidavit evidence; Appealability — rights under Appellate Jurisdiction Act versus Winding‑Up Rules.
|
16 April 2002 |
|
Reported
Default judgment at mediation was unlawful where the defendant’s advocate attended; judgment quashed and matter remitted.
Civil procedure — Alternative Dispute Resolution (mediation) — O. VIII A r.5 — limits of judicial powers against defaulting parties — default judgment not authorised; presence of advocate defeats invocation of sub‑rule; private Notice of Mediation cannot confer power to enter default judgment.
|
4 April 2002 |
| March 2002 |
|
|
No appeal lies from a High Court decision on an objection to attachment under O.XXI r.62; notice of appeal struck out.
Garnishee/attachment – Order XXI Rules 57–62 CPC – Objection proceedings – Rule 62 prescribes suit to establish rights and bars ordinary appeal – No appeal to Court of Appeal from High Court determination of attachment objections; stay of execution requires proper right of appeal or irreparable harm; Court’s power under Rules (Rule 3) to depart in interests of justice; personal costs against advocates for abusive/prolonged proceedings.
|
27 March 2002 |
|
Applicant granted extension to seek revision after lack of knowledge and possible illegality in High Court proceedings were shown.
Civil procedure – extension of time to apply for revision – lack of knowledge of judgment – adequacy of evidence to prove knowledge (hearsay) – consent judgment – requirement to set aside consent judgment before retrial – alleged illegality of proceedings.
|
21 March 2002 |
| February 2002 |
|
|
Conviction based mainly on accomplice testimony and recent possession was unsafe absent clear proof linking the goods to the robbery.
* Criminal law – Robbery – reliance on accomplice testimony and recent possession of allegedly stolen goods – need for satisfactory independent corroboration and clear linkage to stolen property.
* Evidence – proof of provenance of recovered property – absence of identifying marks and delay in recovery undermining prosecution case.
* Appeal – incomplete or carelessly kept record may affect safety of conviction and justify interference on second appeal.
|
27 February 2002 |
|
Reported
A TShs.5,000,000 security-for-costs requirement unlawfully denied indigent petitioners access to election petitions.
Constitutional law — Access to justice — Elections Act s.111(2) requiring TShs.5,000,000 security for costs — arbitrary and disproportionate limitation on Article 13 rights — implied repeal of Rule 11(3) but Rule 11(3) remains operative after s.111(2) declared void. |
14 February 2002 |
|
Minor drafting defects and imperfect verification in a supporting affidavit do not automatically render a stay application incurably defective; amendment allowed.
Civil procedure — stay of execution — objection to competency — supporting affidavit alleged to be incurably defective for speculative paragraphs, reliance on another pending suit, and defective verification — court may allow amendment — rules to facilitate substantive justice.
|
12 February 2002 |
|
Reported
Mandatory security-for-costs requirements that restrict indigent petitioners' access to election justice are unconstitutional and void.
Constitutional law – Elections – Election petitions – Security for costs – Parliamentary lawmaking powers – Equality before the law – Right of access to courts – Constitutionality of mandatory deposit as security for costs – Judicial discretion – Discrimination against indigent litigants. |
12 February 2002 |
|
Court allowed reference, finding conflicting findings on transfer evidence warranted appellate consideration and ordered costs in the cause.
Property law – transfer of ownership – evidentiary value of photocopied transfer documents and Certificate of Title – conflicting findings at trial and on single-judge review – leave to appeal to Court of Appeal.
|
7 February 2002 |
| January 2002 |
|
|
Taxation of adjournment costs limited to reasonable expenses personally incurred on adjournment date, not per diem for dependants.
Costs — Taxation — Rule 118(2) and Third Schedule govern taxation; per diem not substitute for scales except as guide; expenses of non-parties not allowable; only reasonable personal costs on adjournment date recoverable; lump-sum assessment permissible.
|
1 January 2002 |
|
|
1 January 2002 |
|
Appellant’s inconsistent accounts and lack of objection to statements led to admissibility of confessions and dismissal of appeal.
* Criminal law – Confessions – Trial within a trial required only where voluntariness is objected to; absent objection, statements may be admitted. * Criminal procedure – Preliminary hearing – non‑reference to a document at preliminary hearing does not bar its admission at trial. * Evidence – Accused’s inconsistent statements and lies may corroborate co‑accused confessions and support conviction. * Procedure – Order of recording statements is immaterial to admissibility.
|
1 January 2002 |
|
No automatic right of appeal from High Court objections to attachment; Rule 62 requires suit to establish rights.
Civil procedure – Attachment and garnishee orders – Order XXI Rules 57–62 – Investigation of claims and objections – Rule 62 provides suit as remedy, not an automatic right of appeal; English authorities persuasive but not binding where Tanzanian law is clear.
|
1 January 2002 |