|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2018 |
|
|
Stay of execution refused: applicants showed loss and timely appeal but failed to provide mandatory security.
Court of Appeal — stay of execution — Rule 11(2) Court of Appeal Rules — mandatory cumulative conditions: substantial loss, absence of unreasonable delay, and security for due performance — possession of original title by respondent does not obviate need for alternative security — property subject to decretal sale cannot serve as security.
|
27 December 2018 |
|
Appeal dismissed as misconceived; proper remedy was to apply to set aside the summary decree under Order XXXV r.8.
Civil Procedure – Summary suit under Order XXXV CPC – Proper use of summons to appear and defend – Joinder of guarantors in summary proceedings – Summary/default judgment akin to ex‑parte decree – Setting aside summary decrees under Order XXXV r.8 requires exceptional circumstances and a prima facie defence – Appellate limitation: courts should not decide issues not determined by trial court; Rule 93(1) compliance.
|
24 December 2018 |
|
A trial magistrate cannot close the prosecution's case; improper closure vitiates subsequent proceedings and requires rehearing.
Criminal procedure — trial magistrate has no power to close prosecution's case — improper closure prejudices prosecution and vitiates subsequent proceedings — unfinished witness evidence and denial of cross‑examination — remedy: quash closure and order rehearing under s.4(2) AJA; ancillary issues: identification, admissibility of cautioned statements, failure to tender vehicle as exhibit.
|
24 December 2018 |
|
Revision against a High Court interim injunction is barred as interlocutory under section 5(2)(d) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
* Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.5(2)(d) – bar on appeals/revisions against interlocutory High Court orders; interlocutory proceedings defined; revision competency. * Civil Procedure – Order XXXVII r.5 – remedy to vary/discharge injunction. * Record of revision – requirement to include relevant documents under s.4(3) AJA.
|
24 December 2018 |
|
An appeal brought without required leave is incompetent and must be struck out, not withdrawn or dismissed.
Civil procedure — Appeal requiring leave — Incompetence for want of leave — Court lacks jurisdiction — Incompetent appeals are struck out rather than dismissed or withdrawn — Application of Rules 102(2) and 102(5).
|
24 December 2018 |
|
An appeal against a summary judgment is misconceived; defendants should apply to set aside the decree showing exceptional circumstances and a defence.
Civil procedure – Summary suits (Order XXXV CPC) – summons to appear and defend – effect of non-appearance – summary judgment akin to ex-parte decree – setting aside summary decree (Order XXXV r.8) – requirement to show exceptional circumstances and meritorious defence – improper to raise undecided trial issues on appeal.
|
20 December 2018 |
|
Unexplained delay in arrest undermined eyewitness identification; the applicant's alibi prevailed and convictions were quashed.
* Criminal law - Visual identification - reliability of eyewitness identification; * Criminal procedure - unexplained delay in arrest and its effect on witness credibility; * Alibi - effect of credible alibi where identification evidence is not watertight; * Standard of proof - prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
12 December 2018 |
| November 2018 |
|
|
|
24 November 2018 |
|
Applicant permitted to amend an affidavit under Rule 50 to add omitted verification paragraphs; omission deemed an oversight.
* Civil procedure – Amendment of affidavits – Rule 50(1) & (2) Court of Appeal Rules – permissibility and procedure; * Verification clause omissions – oversight versus negligence; * Amendment as correction of the existing record (no need to withdraw affidavit); * Promptness and filing time for amended documents; * Costs to abide outcome of main application.
|
22 November 2018 |
|
Revision application struck out for failure to file requisite lower court proceedings, rulings and extracted orders.
Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(3) and Court of Appeal Rules Rule 65 — Revision applications must include copies of lower court proceedings, ruling and extracted order; failure to attach renders application incompetent and liable to be struck out; competence of revision to challenge execution orders; procedural non-compliance fatal to application.
|
14 November 2018 |
|
Court granted stay of execution pending appeal where applicant showed good cause and undertook bank-guarantee security.
Civil procedure — Stay of execution pending appeal — Rule 11(2) TTCAR — conditions: timely notice of appeal, good cause, absence of unreasonable delay, and security — bank guarantee equal to decretal sum accepted as security.
|
9 November 2018 |
|
A revision cannot substitute for an appeal; the applicant’s revision was struck out as incompetent with costs.
Appellate v. revisional jurisdiction; revision not an alternative to appeal except in exceptional circumstances; payment of court fees does not extend statutory time for appeal; incompetence of revision veiling an appeal.
|
9 November 2018 |
|
|
8 November 2018 |
|
Assessors’ failure to give individual opinions under s.298(1) CPA may be cured if co‑assessors expressly adopt a filed joint opinion.
Criminal procedure – assessors’ role – s.298(1) Criminal Procedure Act – requirement for each assessor to give an individual opinion – joint opinion read by one assessor – curable irregularity where co‑assessors expressly adopt joint written opinion and document is filed – retrial only where record silent or no adoption.
|
6 November 2018 |
|
Bail application by a respondent in an EOCCA offence involving ≥Tsh10 million must be filed in the High Court.
Criminal procedure – EOCCA s29(4)(d) – bail jurisdiction where property value ≥ Tshs.10,000,000 – distinction between High Court and its Corruption and Economic Crimes Division – s12(5) certificate does not override s29(4)(d).
|
2 November 2018 |
|
|
2 November 2018 |
|
|
1 November 2018 |
| October 2018 |
|
|
Appellant cleared and delivered goods; court found no evidence of tampering and allowed appeal, quashing unproven damages.
Carriage and clearing agents — custody of imported goods at port; inspection by TRA need not involve carrier/respondent; pleadings must define issues for trial; findings on un‑pleaded matters vitiate judgment; special damages must be pleaded and proved; appellate allowance where award unsupported by invoice and evidence.
|
30 October 2018 |
|
A notice of appeal must name every appellant; misnaming is incurable and renders a joint appeal incompetent.
* Criminal procedure – notice of intention to appeal under s.361(1)(a) CPA – format of written notice; requirement to title "In the High Court of Tanzania" (prospective). * Procedural requirement – Notice of Appeal must name all appellants; misdescription as "and another" is incurable and renders appeal incompetent. * Court of Appeal Rules – Rule 72 (time for memorandum) requires proof of service of record before late filing sanctions apply. * Preliminary objections – improper titling objection overruled where requirement was not mandatory at time of filing.
|
30 October 2018 |
|
Applicant failed to account for delay; extension of time refused and appeal dismissed with costs.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Applicant must account for each day of delay; unexplained delay fatal to claim for extension.
* Civil procedure — Affidavits — Counter-affidavit filed out of time without leave should be struck off or expunged; omission to do so is error but may be non-prejudicial.
* Judicial conduct — Allegation of bias — Must be supported by record; unsupported allegations dismissed.
* Appeal — Point of law of sufficient importance — Must be apparent on the face of the record to justify enlarging time (Valambhia; Lyamuya principles).
|
30 October 2018 |
|
Appeal struck out because the record omitted the mandatory plaint without High Court leave.
Appeal — Record of appeal — completeness — pleadings (plaint) mandatory under Rule 96(1)(c) Court of Appeal Rules — only High Court Justice/Registrar may order exclusion under Rule 96(3) — omission renders record incomplete and appeal incompetent — appeal struck out with costs.
|
30 October 2018 |
|
Court vacated its finding that a representation dispute justified revision and ordered re-opening for parties to be heard.
Revisional jurisdiction — Appeal versus revision — Whether unresolved dispute as to a party's legal representation amounts to good and sufficient cause to prefer revision — Procedural fairness (audi alteram partem) — Rule 66(6) modification of Court's decision.
|
29 October 2018 |
|
A filed notice of appeal suspends limitation and ousts High Court jurisdiction until the Court of Appeal determines the matter.
Limitation law – effect of filing notice of appeal – filing notice of appeal divests High Court of jurisdiction and suspends limitation; Rule 91(a) – notice not ineffective without court order; procedural consequence – premature suit and proper remedy.
|
26 October 2018 |
|
Technical delay from an appeal struck out as incompetent can constitute good cause to extend time to file a fresh notice of appeal.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time – Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – discretion to extend time upon good cause shown.
* Technical delay – where an originally timeous appeal is struck out as incompetent, ensuing delay in filing fresh appeal may be excusable.
* Promptness – prompt action after striking out and refusal of prior enlargement supports grant of extension.
* Competence of appeal – failure to attach leave or inconsistent dates may render appeal incompetent, but does not preclude fresh extension application.
|
25 October 2018 |
|
A notice of appeal that fails to name an appellant is incurably defective and the appeal is struck out.
* Criminal procedure – notice of intention to appeal under s.361(1)(a) CPA – format and title – Court prescribes "In the High Court of Tanzania" for written notices (prospective effect). * Civil/criminal appellate procedure – Rule 68(1) Court of Appeal Rules – Notice of Appeal must properly name all appellants; misdescription as "and another" is incurably defective. * Court of Appeal Rules – Rule 72(1) on lodging memorandum of appeal – dismissal for late filing requires proof of service of the record.
|
25 October 2018 |
|
The applicant's revision application was time-barred; the Court struck it out and awarded costs to the respondent who raised the objection.
Time bar; preliminary objection to competency of application; strike out versus dismissal; award of costs to respondent who raised successful objection.
|
25 October 2018 |
|
An extension application is incompetent where the applicant failed to file the requisite notice of appeal after the prior appeal was struck out.
* Civil procedure – extension of time – prerequisite notice of appeal – a fresh notice or extension to file it must precede an application for extension to file appeal when prior appeal was struck out. * Concurrent jurisdiction – Rule 47 – application for extension to file notice of appeal should be made in High Court in first instance. * Striking out – absence of requisite notice renders extension application incompetent; merits not considered.
|
25 October 2018 |
|
|
25 October 2018 |
|
A subordinate court’s trial is void where economic-offence prosecutions proceed without the D.P.P.’s consent or certificate.
* Criminal procedure – Jurisdiction – Economic offences under the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act – prior consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions (s.26(1)) and certificate under s.12(3)-(4) required for subordinate courts to try economic offences – absence of such consent/certificate renders trial a nullity.; * Charge-sheet defects – combining economic and non-economic offences without statutory authorization invalidates proceedings.
|
25 October 2018 |
|
Court granted extension of time under rule 10 to include missing transcribed pages, finding good cause and no undue prejudice.
* Civil procedure – extension of time – rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – "good cause" to be determined by circumstances and jurisprudence.
* Appeals – record of appeal – inclusion of missing transcribed pages under rule 96(6).
* Evidence – reconciling variance between documentary evidence and affidavit – courts may accept affidavit explanation if satisfactory.
* Prejudice – respondent's claim of prejudice insufficient to defeat leave to amend record where applicant acted promptly.
|
25 October 2018 |
|
A successor judge must record reasons for taking over a trial; failure makes subsequent proceedings null and orders retrial.
Procedure — Order XVIII Rule 10(1) CPC — Successor judge must record reasons for taking over an unfinished trial; failure renders successor’s proceedings, judgment and decree a nullity; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2) — revisional power to quash and order trial to continue before another judge; Exhibits/endorsement (Order XIII r.4(1) CPC and Court of Appeal Rules r.96(1)(k)) raised but not determined as successor-judge defect was dispositive.
|
25 October 2018 |
|
Court vacated finding of good cause for revision and reopened hearing to hear parties on a representation dispute.
Appellate procedure - revision v appeal - choice where order is appealable - good and sufficient cause - dispute as to legal representation on record - audi alteram partem - re-opening of hearing - Rule 66(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules.
|
23 October 2018 |
|
|
23 October 2018 |
|
|
22 October 2018 |
|
|
22 October 2018 |
|
Revision against interlocutory High Court orders in execution proceedings is barred by section 5(2)(d) AJA.
* Appellate procedure – Revision – Interlocutory orders – Section 5(2)(d) AJA bars appeals/revision against interlocutory decisions unless they finally determine the suit. * Civil procedure – Execution – Applications to lift corporate veil and court assistance in execution – interlocutory nature of preliminary rulings. * "Nature of the order" test – whether the impugned order finally disposes of parties' rights (Bozson test applied).
|
19 October 2018 |
|
Amendment of a notice of appeal to correct citation and judge's name allowed where sought before any objection.
Civil procedure — Appeal — Amendment of notice of appeal under Rule 111 — Court may allow amendment "at any time" meaning before objection is taken; correction of wrong rule citation and misspelt judge's name permitted where application brought before objection — prior authorities refusing amendments where objection earlier taken distinguished; costs in the cause.
|
17 October 2018 |
|
Amendment under Rule 111 to correct clerical errors in a notice of appeal is permitted if sought before any objection is taken.
Civil procedure — Rule 111 Court of Appeal Rules — amendment of notice of appeal; interpretation of "at any time" as before objection is taken; clerical errors (wrong rule citation, misspelt judge's name) curable by amendment where no prior objection; costs in the cause.
|
17 October 2018 |
|
An omnibus application combining extension of time to file notice of appeal and leave to appeal is incompetent and struck out.
* Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules – Rule 106(19) (waiver of written submissions) – alleged "exceptional circumstances" by reason of illegalities in the decision below. * Civil procedure – Omnibus/duplicative applications – combining extension of time to file notice of appeal with extension to apply for leave to appeal is incompetent. * Court of Appeal Rules – Rule 46(1) and Rule 83(4) – procedural sequencing: notice of appeal before application for leave or certificate. * Remedy – striking out defective application; no order as to costs where defect raised suo motu by court.
|
17 October 2018 |
|
The appeal was struck out as filed out of time; a Registrar's certificate of delay was valid and time limitation is jurisdictional.
Appeal – time limit for instituting appeal under Rule 90(1) – certificate of delay under Registrar’s seal – validity of certificate issued after delivery of copies; jurisdictional nature of limitation periods; Rule 4(2)(a) not available to cure time-bar.
|
17 October 2018 |
|
|
16 October 2018 |
|
Application for revision struck out as it sought to challenge interlocutory High Court orders barred by section 5(2)(d) AJA.
Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.5(2)(d) – appeal or revision barred against interlocutory orders; Nature of the order test (Bozson) – final disposal of parties' rights; Execution proceedings – lifting corporate veil and Order XXI r.10(2)(j) CPC (assistance/arrest as civil prisoner); Exceptional circumstances and right to be heard – threshold for Court of Appeal intervention by revision.
|
15 October 2018 |
|
A revision cannot challenge interlocutory High Court orders that do not finally determine the suit.
* Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.5(2)(d) – prohibition of appeal/revision against interlocutory orders unless suit is finally determined. * Interlocutory v final orders – "nature of the order" test. * Execution proceedings – lifting corporate veil and arrest of alleged company officer under Order XXI r.10(2)(j). * Revision – exceptional circumstances and right to be heard not established.
|
15 October 2018 |
|
Application for leave filed after the 14-day period under Rule 45(b) is time-barred and therefore struck out.
* Civil procedure – Appeal – Leave to appeal – Rule 45(b) Court of Appeal Rules – where High Court refuses leave, application to Court of Appeal must be filed within 14 days – late application incompetent and struck out. * Court may raise competence (time-bar) suo motu; no order as to costs where point raised by court.
|
15 October 2018 |
|
Non-compliance with Rules 11(2)(b) and 18 renders a stay of execution application incompetent and it is struck out; costs shared.
Court of Appeal Rules 2009 — Rule 18 endorsement of documents — mandatory lodging requirement; Rule 11(2)(b) — requirement to append notice of appeal to stay application — non-compliance fatal; competence of application for stay of execution; suo motu raising of procedural defects; striking out incompetent application.
|
5 October 2018 |
|
Failure to endorse or append a notice of appeal under Rules 18 and 11(2)(b) renders a stay application incompetent.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Mandatory procedural requirements for stay applications – Rule 11(2)(b) (notice of appeal to be appended to notice of motion) and Rule 18 (mandatory endorsement of lodged documents) – Non‑compliance renders application incompetent and subject to striking out.
|
5 October 2018 |
|
A notice of appeal failing to specify the nature of the order appealed against is incurably defective and the appeal is struck out.
Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Rule 68(1),(2) and (7) Court of Appeal Rules – Requirement to state nature of order appealed against and substantial conformity to Form B; Interpretation of Laws Act – mandatory meaning of "shall"; incurable defect renders appeal incompetent; Rule 4(2)(b) not available to circumvent mandatory procedural requirements.
|
5 October 2018 |
|
|
1 October 2018 |
|
An appeal is incompetent and must be struck out where judgment and decree dates conflict with Order XX r.7(1); costs awarded to respondent.
Civil procedure – competence of appeal – variance between judgment date and decree date – contravention of Order XX r.7(1) Civil Procedure Code – preliminary objection – appeal struck out as incompetent – costs awarded to respondent for preparation expenses.
|
1 October 2018 |
|
Appeal struck out for conflicting judgment and decree dates (Order XX r.7(1)), with costs awarded to the respondent.
Civil procedure — Appeal competence — Variance between judgment and decree dates — Breach of Order XX r.7(1) Civil Procedure Code — Preliminary objection — Appeal struck out; costs awarded for preparation expenses.
|
1 October 2018 |