|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2017 |
|
|
Prison appellant’s omission to complete Form B/1 excused; substituted memorandum valid and preliminary objections overruled.
Criminal procedure – appeals from prison – Rule 68 notice vs Rule 75(1) Form B/1 – omission by officer‑in‑charge – substituted memorandum under Rule 73(2) – Court’s discretion under Rules 2, 4(2)(b) and 72(5) to overlook non‑compliance in interests of justice.
|
20 December 2017 |
|
Court upheld refusal to extend time, finding lack of diligence and conflicting drawn order insufficient good cause.
Civil procedure — Extension of time — Good cause under Rule 10 — Applicant's diligence and length of delay — Alleged conflict between oral ruling and drawn order — Interference with single Justice's discretion (Mbogo principles).
|
4 December 2017 |
|
A chemist who analysed, sealed and reported on seized drugs may tender exhibits without being their formal custodian.
Evidence—Exhibits—Competency to tender—A chemist who received, examined, analysed, sealed and reported on seized packages is competent to tender them though not the formal custodian; possession and knowledge at some point suffices—Trial judge erred in excluding exhibits for lack of proof of transfer or unavailability of named custodian.
|
4 December 2017 |
| November 2017 |
|
|
Court dismissed preliminary objections, holding registry endorsement omission not fatal and locus standi a substantive issue for revision.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time (Rule 10) — discretionary relief requiring good cause (length and reason for delay, prejudice);
* Locus standi — whether non-parties may seek revision — substantive issue to be determined at revision stage;
* Affidavit validity — essential jurat/signatures vs. Registrar endorsement (Rule 18) — omission not fatal; Rule 23 inapplicable;
* Preliminary objections — court should not decide substantive issues at interlocutory extension stage.
|
30 November 2017 |
|
A forensic analyst who examined and documented items may tender them; strict custodian-only rule is not required.
Evidence — Competence to tender exhibits — forensic analyst who received, opened, analyzed, sealed and reported on items may tender them; possession with knowledge suffices over strict custodian requirement; chain of custody and dispatch absence not automatic grounds for exclusion. Criminal procedure — remittal for admission of exhibits; trial to continue before same judge absent s.299(1) reasons.
|
21 November 2017 |
|
Applicant's long delay and lack of diligence did not constitute good cause for extension of time; reference dismissed.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Good cause under Rule 10 — Delay, diligence and prejudice. * Appellate procedure — Interference with single Justice's discretion — Only where decision is clearly wrong, misdirected, or failed to consider relevant matters. * Procedure — Conflict between court ruling and drawn order does not automatically constitute good cause if applicant was present and failed to act promptly.
|
20 November 2017 |
|
Denial of the right to be heard is an illegality sufficient to grant extension to file a revision.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time – Application for revision – Whether denial of right to be heard (condemnation unheard) is an illegality constituting good cause for extension. * Natural justice – Right to be heard – Proprietary interests affected by a decision in proceedings to which one was not a party. * Appellate practice – Extension applications not forum for substantive determination of the underlying dispute.
|
20 November 2017 |
|
Appeal dismissed: court held child competency, penetration and victim's age proved; conviction and life sentence restored.
* Evidence — Voir dire; competency of child witness under s.127 Evidence Act; court must record findings and may inquire into understanding of oath and truthfulness.
* Criminal law — Rape; essential element of penetration may be proved by victim’s testimony corroborated by medical report (PF3); bruises or sperm not requisite.
* Evidence — Identification in daylight by a known witness; corroboration by family witness admissible.
* Evidence — No fixed number of witnesses required to prove a case (s.143 Evidence Act); non‑production of some witnesses not necessarily fatal.
* Appeals — Second appeal; concurrent findings of fact will not be disturbed absent misdirection or non‑direction.
|
20 November 2017 |
|
Extension granted where counsel promptly applied after discovering failure to serve, amounting to "good cause" under Rule 10.
Court of Appeal procedure – extension of time under Rule 10 – "good cause" requires prompt, expeditious and bona fide action upon discovery of omission; counsel’s workload/absence of colleague can explain delay if followed by immediate remedial steps; precedent applied (Royal Insurance v Kiwengwa Strand Hotel).
|
20 November 2017 |
|
The applicant's restoration motion was struck out for failing to file mandatory written submissions and to serve all respondents.
* Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Rule 106(1): mandatory filing of written submissions within sixty days – non-compliance fatal to competence.
* Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Rule 48(4): mandatory service of application and supporting documents on all affected parties within fourteen days – non-compliance renders application incompetent.
* Pleadings and practice – inability to cure failure to file mandatory written submissions by oral permission at hearing.
* Procedural dismissal – striking out for want of competency where mandatory rules are not complied with.
|
16 November 2017 |
|
Denial of hearing to a non‑party whose ownership was affected is an illegality warranting extension to file revision.
Civil procedure – extension of time – denial of right to be heard/illegality as sufficient good cause; non‑party purchaser affected by probate/high court order; restraint on deciding substantive issues in extension applications.
|
16 November 2017 |
|
Appeal allowed: buyer remained indebted; VAT was payable/paid and counterclaim for VAT wrongly granted, award reversed.
Civil procedure – evidence and indebtedness – effect of dishonoured post‑dated cheque and absence of proof of subsequent payment; Tax law – VAT on imported motor vehicle where vehicle registered jointly in buyer and financier’s names; Court procedure – calling a witness suo motu and parties’ right to cross‑examine.
|
16 November 2017 |
|
Applicant failed to prove sufficient cause for non-appearance; restoration application dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Restoration of application dismissed for non-appearance – Rule 63(2) Court of Appeal Rules – burden on applicant to show sufficient cause – evidence required to corroborate alleged prevention (e.g., affidavits, photographs) – failure to communicate and choice of distant accommodation may constitute inaction, laxity or negligence.
|
16 November 2017 |
|
Applicant granted extension after court found ruling sufficed for Rule 49(3) and delay caused by late certified copy constituted good cause.
Civil procedure – extension of time – Rule 49(3) Court of Appeal Rules – requirement to append decision to application for leave – distinction (or lack thereof) between "order" and "ruling" – preliminary objection on jurisdiction – good cause where delay due to late supply of certified copy.
|
15 November 2017 |
|
Failure to file mandatory written submissions and to serve all respondents rendered restoration application incompetent and struck out.
Court of Appeal Rules — Rule 106(1): mandatory filing of written submissions — failure fatal; Rule 48(4): mandatory service on all affected parties — non-compliance renders application incompetent; restoration under Rule 63(3) defeated by procedural non-compliance.
|
14 November 2017 |
|
An application affecting a person's rights cannot proceed without service; failure to serve is a fatal irregularity, but substituted service was permitted.
Court of Appeal procedure – service on interested parties – inability to hear application affecting a person's rights in their absence – failure to serve is fatal irregularity (Rule 22(9)) – discretion to grant substituted service/adjourn to enable revision application – costs award for attending respondent.
|
14 November 2017 |
|
Extension of time granted where prior stay application was struck out and alleged illegality warranted appellate review.
Extension of time – Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – Technical delay versus negligence – Application struck out for non‑appended notice of appeal – Alleged illegality in impugned judgment (purchaser condemned unheard; burden of proof; unclaimed award) – Duty to consider illegality per Devram Vallambhia – Precedent: Fortunatus Masha.
|
14 November 2017 |
|
|
13 November 2017 |
|
Extension of time granted where counsel promptly acted after discovering failure to serve the respondent.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules — ‘good cause’ required — applicant must act expeditiously upon discovering omission — prompt filing after discovery supports discretion to extend time.
|
13 November 2017 |
|
Application for security for costs dismissed for failure to prove respondent’s insolvency and unjustified quantum.
* Civil procedure – Security for costs – Requirement that applicant prove respondent’s insolvency or poverty before ordering security. * Competency of application – Citation of superfluous or inapplicable provisions does not defeat competency if an enabling provision is cited. * Foreign litigant – Possession of valid resident/work permits and shareholdings are relevant to ability to meet costs. * Quantum of security – Court may assess reasonableness despite statutory figures being outdated.
|
10 November 2017 |
|
|
10 November 2017 |
|
Extension of time granted where tribunal’s belated supply of vital documents caused delay beyond applicant's control.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules — factors: length of delay, reason for delay, promptness.
* Appeal procedure — Record of appeal — Rule 96(1)(d),(h),(k) — necessity of exhibits, valid decree and assessors' opinion for a complete record.
* Delay caused by registry/tribunal — whether beyond applicant's control — sufficient cause for extension.
|
9 November 2017 |
|
Preliminary objections dismissed; lack of registrar endorsement on affidavit is not fatal; substantive issues reserved for revision.
Civil procedure — extension of time (Rule 10) — good cause and discretion; Preliminary objections — locus standi and prematurity — substantive issues to be determined at revision stage; Affidavit formalities — Registrar endorsement not essential to validity; Rule 18 endorsement concerns administrative filing date.
|
9 November 2017 |
|
Extension of time granted where Registrar's delay and alleged illegality in the High Court judgment constituted good cause.
Court of Appeal — extension of time — delay caused by Registry/Registrar — erroneous certificate of delay — good cause; alleged illegality in lower court decision as ground for extension — exercise of discretion; costs — each party to bear own costs.
|
9 November 2017 |
|
Second appeal dismissed: child witness competency, penetration and age proved; conviction and life sentence restored.
* Evidence Act s.127 – voir dire – competency of child witness – nature of oath and sufficient intelligence; corroboration by demeanour.* Criminal law – rape – requirement of penetration – victim’s evidence corroborated by medical examination and PF3.* Criminal procedure – appellate review – concurrent findings of fact not lightly disturbed; clerical/typing errors do not vitiate conviction.* Evidence – proof of age and identification; absence of particular witnesses not fatal.
|
8 November 2017 |
|
Seller’s appeal allowed: buyer remained indebted and VAT was payable where vehicle was jointly registered with a non‑exempt financier.
Civil appeal – sale of motor vehicle – promissory note and dishonoured post‑dated cheque – indebtedness; Tax law – VAT on importation vs registration – joint ownership with non‑exempt financier; Procedural law – court‑called witness and parties’ right to question; Counterclaim for VAT refund – entitlement where VAT paid to TRA.
|
8 November 2017 |
|
Court dismissed application for security for costs, finding applicant failed to prove respondent's impecuniosity or bad faith.
Court of Appeal — Security for costs — Rule 120(3) relates to appeals; applications properly fall under rule 4(2)(a) — Citing inapplicable provisions not necessarily fatal — Discretionary nature of security orders — Applicant bears burden to prove impecuniosity, near insolvency or bad faith — Insufficient evidence, application dismissed.
|
7 November 2017 |
|
Application for security for costs dismissed where respondent’s permits and shareholdings showed ability to meet litigation costs.
Civil procedure — Security for costs — Applicant sought USD 20,000 alleging respondent (foreign national) had no Tanzanian assets — Competency of application despite citation of inapplicable Rules — Requirement to prove poverty/insolvency — Resident/work permits and shareholdings evidence of ability to meet costs — Quantum of security unjustified.
|
7 November 2017 |
|
A withdrawn appeal leaves no steps to rely on; a re-lodged appeal must meet Rule 90(1) time limits or be struck out.
Civil procedure — Appeal time limits — Rule 90(1) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 — effect of withdrawal/striking out of an appeal — previous steps do not survive; certificate under repealed Rules ineffective; procedural non-compliance fatal to appeal. (Background tax/VAT dispute not reached on merits.)
|
7 November 2017 |
|
An unequivocal guilty plea precludes appeal against conviction unless one of the narrow Laurence Mpinga exceptions applies.
Criminal procedure — Plea of guilty — Appeal against conviction ordinarily barred by s.360(1) CPA — Exceptions per Laurence Mpinga (imperfect/ambiguous plea; mistake/misapprehension; charge discloses no offence; admitted facts do not constitute offence) — Unequivocal plea requires admission of all ingredients — Admission of exhibits by accused without objection — Sentencing: reduction where trial court exceeded appropriate sentence for a first offender.
|
7 November 2017 |
|
Applicant's failure to provide required security or binding undertaking resulted in dismissal of stay of execution application.
Court of Appeal — Stay of execution — Rule 11(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules — Mandatory cumulative conditions (substantial loss, no unreasonable delay, security) — Disputed property cannot serve as security — Undertaking by counsel at the bar not a binding security — Non-compliance fatal to stay application.
|
6 November 2017 |
|
Failure to enter a conviction before sentencing renders the trial court's judgment and sentence null; record remitted for proper conviction.
Criminal procedure — Conviction — Requirement to enter conviction before sentence (s.235(1) Criminal Procedure Act) — Failure to enter conviction is fatal, not curable — Revisionary powers (s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act) — Remittal for proper conviction and sentencing.
|
6 November 2017 |
|
The appellant’s appeal filed after the 60-day Rule 90(1) limitation was incompetent and struck out.
* Tax appeals – limitation period – Rule 90(1) Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules – sixty days to lodge memorandum and record of appeal.
* Computation of time – interim unaccounted days between notice of appeal and request for records count towards limitation period.
* Certificate of Delay – Registrar’s certificate must specifically exclude unaccounted days to cure delay.
* Tax procedure – question on Board’s jurisdiction (notice/objection requirements) left open for future determination.
|
3 November 2017 |
|
An appeal was struck out because the record omitted a tribunal document without court-authorised exclusion.
Appellate procedure – Record of appeal – completeness – omission of tribunal exhibit (Annexure) – Rule 96(2)(c) and Rule 96(3) Court of Appeal Rules – necessity for judicial/Registrar direction to exclude documents – preliminary objection – incompetence and striking out appeal.
|
3 November 2017 |
|
|
3 November 2017 |
|
Application for extension of time dismissed for non-appearance under Rule 63(1); applicant ordered to pay costs.
Civil procedure – application for extension of time – dismissal for non-appearance under Rule 63(1) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – service of notice – costs ordered against applicant.
|
3 November 2017 |
|
|
3 November 2017 |
|
|
3 November 2017 |
|
Successor judge’s failure to record reasons under s.299(1) CPA is jurisdictional, rendering proceedings null and prompting retrial.
Criminal procedure — Section 299(1) CPA — Successor judge must record reason for taking over partly heard High Court trial — Failure to do so is jurisdictional and renders proceedings a nullity — Parties' consent does not cure defect — Quashment and retrial appropriate remedy.
|
2 November 2017 |
|
|
2 November 2017 |
|
Extension of time to seek a ‘second bite’ leave in land cases is incompetent; only the High Court may grant leave.
Land law – Section 47(1) Land Disputes Courts Act – exclusive High Court jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal in land matters; Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction to entertain 'second bite' leave applications; extension of time cannot be granted to achieve an outcome beyond the Court's jurisdiction; proper remedy is appeal under s.5(1)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
2 November 2017 |
|
Extension of time to file written submissions granted due to bereavement; hearing proceeded in absence of duly served respondent.
Court of Appeal — Extension of time under Rule 10 — Good cause established by bereavement and travel — Hearing in absence permitted under Rule 63(2) — Thirty-day extension granted; costs each party to bear.
|
1 November 2017 |
| October 2017 |
|
|
AG may seek revision of finalized proceedings affecting public interest, but an incomplete record renders the application incompetent.
Administrative law - Attorney General's right of audience (Office of the Attorney General Act) applies to pending proceedings; Appellate Jurisdiction Act - revision is proper remedy for non-parties affected by finalized judgments; civil procedure - incomplete record (missing pleadings/exhibits) renders application incompetent; preliminary objections - concession on point leads to striking out with costs.
|
31 October 2017 |
|
|
31 October 2017 |
|
|
31 October 2017 |
|
Date variance and minor witness contradictions do not overturn conviction when medical and circumstantial evidence proves murder.
* Criminal law – Charge particulars – Variance between date on information and date of death – date on information should be that of the unlawful act (injuries) not necessarily date of death.
* Criminal procedure – Applicability of Part VII CPA (s.234(3)) to High Court trials governed by Part VIII – Part VII governs subordinate courts; principle may be instructive but not directly applicable.
* Evidence – Witness inconsistencies and self-contradictions – minor inconsistencies do not defeat prosecution case where core narrative is credible.
* Evidence – Circumstantial and medical evidence – post-mortem and witness accounts sufficient to uphold murder conviction.
|
30 October 2017 |
|
A stay of execution requires good cause, risk of substantial loss and factual proof of security, not merely argument.
Civil procedure – Stay of execution under Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 (Rule 11(2)); requirements: timely notice of appeal, good cause, risk of substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and proof of security for due performance; proof of security must be pleaded in affidavit or notice, not only in submissions.
|
27 October 2017 |
|
A statutory appeal under the Labour Institutions Act is an adequate remedy; statutory avenues must be exhausted before Basic Rights Act relief.
Labour law; constitutionality of section 35 Employment and Labour Relations Act; Basic Rights and Duties Act s.8(2); adequate statutory remedy; appeal under Labour Institutions Act s.57; exhaustion of remedies; jurisdiction.
|
27 October 2017 |
|
Assessors improperly cross‑examining witnesses and inadequate summing up on circumstantial evidence vitiated the trial, ordering retrial.
Criminal procedure — Assessors may put questions but must not cross-examine; cross-examination is the role of the adverse party — sections 177, 290, 294(2) CPA and sections 146, 177 Evidence Act; Re-examination after assessors' intervention breaches defence rights; Trial judge must properly sum up to assessors on circumstantial evidence and 'last person seen' principle; Failure to direct assessors on vital points renders trial a nullity.
|
27 October 2017 |
|
Respondent's land claim was time-barred; court refused to decide on unpleaded fraud and dismissed the suit.
Limitation of actions – recovery of land – accrual of cause of action – plea that cause arose on date of purported sale; Pleadings – parties bound by pleadings; submissions cannot introduce unpleaded issues (fraud) – evidence required; Preliminary objection – point of law capable of disposing suit; Law of Limitation Act s.3(1) – mandatory dismissal of proceedings instituted after prescribed period; Costs – successful party entitled to costs absent exceptional circumstances.
|
27 October 2017 |