|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| September 2015 |
|
|
A notice of appeal omitting the case number and required particulars is incurably defective and renders the appeal incompetent.
* Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – compliance with Rule 68(2) & (7) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – notice must state case number, date of judgment, presiding judge/magistrate and originating court; non‑compliance renders appeal incompetent; Resident Magistrate (Extended Jurisdiction) decisions must be correctly identified.
|
1 September 2015 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to prove breaking and omitted to call crucial witnesses.
* Criminal law – burden of proof – prosecution must prove breaking and theft beyond reasonable doubt.
* Evidence – particulars of breaking and inspection of scene; general assertions insufficient.
* Witnesses – duty to call material witnesses; failure permits adverse inference (Azizi Abdalla principle).
* Defence – alibi and the court's duty to address it under section 194(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
|
1 September 2015 |
| August 2015 |
|
|
Conviction for housebreaking quashed where particulars and evidence showed burglary; related stealing conviction also quashed as unsafe.
* Criminal law – Distinction between burglary and housebreaking – importance of time (night) in characterization of offence under s. 294 Penal Code.
* Criminal procedure – Effect of misdescription of offence in charge sheet – curability under s. 388 CPA and consequences of convicting for wrong offence.
* Criminal appeals – Safety of convictions based on the same evidence as a defective count – exercise of revisional powers to quash.
* Evidence – Omission of a specific stolen item in particulars does not automatically render the charge defective.
|
31 August 2015 |
|
Night-time visual identification was inadequate; conviction for armed robbery quashed for failure to prove identity.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification at night – adequacy of identification evidence – application of Waziri Amani principles – possibilities of mistaken identity – standard: proof beyond reasonable doubt.
|
31 August 2015 |
|
Court quashed rape conviction after finding summary dismissal improper and unresolved evidential and procedural issues.
Criminal procedure – summary rejection of appeals under s.364(1)(c) CPA – guiding principles for summary dismissal; Evidence – requirement for voir dire of child witness (s.127(2) Evidence Act) and need for corroboration; Admissibility of PF3 (s.240(3) CPA); Appellate revisional powers (s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act) and discretion to order release instead of retrial.
|
31 August 2015 |
|
A notice of appeal that fails to state the nature of the order appealed against is fatally defective and the appeal is struck out.
Court of Appeal Rules — Rule 68(2) — Notice of appeal must state briefly the nature of the conviction, acquittal, sentence, order or finding appealed against; mandatory requirement — failure to comply renders notice fatally defective and appeal incompetent; appeal struck out.
|
28 August 2015 |
|
Failure to enter a formal conviction and particulars renders a sentence illegal; appellate court quashed judgment and remitted record.
Criminal procedure – Mandatory requirement to convict before sentencing (s.235(1) CPA) – Judgment must specify offence and Penal Code section (s.312(2) CPA) – Appellate revisional powers (s.4(2) AJA) – Omission to convict renders sentence illegal and warrant remittal for proper judgment.
|
27 August 2015 |
|
|
27 August 2015 |
|
Conviction reduced to attempted unnatural offence due to insufficient proof of penetration; sentence reduced to 20 years.
* Criminal law – Sexual offences – Unnatural offence (sodomy) vs attempted unnatural offence – requirement to prove penetration for conviction of the full offence. * Evidence – Corroboration of child complainant by parents and third parties; weight of medical evidence (no internal injury) in distinguishing attempt from completed act. * Admissions – caution in accepting oral admissions; expunged cautioned statement cannot sustain conviction. * Appeal – substitution of conviction and sentence where reasonable doubt exists as to the charged offence.
|
27 August 2015 |
|
A notice of appeal omitting the correct High Court case number is incurably defective and renders the appeal incompetent.
Court of Appeal — Notice of appeal — Rule 68(2) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 — requirement to state correct High Court case number — failure fatal — appeal incompetent — suo motu raising of competence.
|
27 August 2015 |
|
A PRM with extended jurisdiction has no authority to hear a High Court application for enlargement of time; transferred proceedings are nullities.
Criminal procedure – Extension of time to file notice of appeal – Jurisdiction – Section 45(2) Magistrates’ Courts Act does not permit transfer of High Court applications for enlargement of time to a PRM-Ext Jur – Proceedings and ruling by PRM in such matters are nullity – Revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA.
|
27 August 2015 |
|
Transfer under s.45(2) MCA limited to appeals; PRM-Ext. Jur. lacked jurisdiction so proceedings were nullified.
Magistrates' Courts Act s.45(2) – Transfer to PRM-Ext. Jur. limited to appeals; PRM-Ext. Jur. lacks jurisdiction to hear extension of time applications; proceedings and ruling by PRM-Ext. Jur. nullity; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2) – Court’s revisional power; competence of successive applications where an earlier application remains pending.
|
27 August 2015 |
|
|
26 August 2015 |
|
A notice of appeal wrongly titled and citing incorrect statutory provisions is a fundamental defect rendering the appeal incompetent.
* Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – requirements under Court of Appeal Rules 2009 (Rule 68) – effect of wrong court title and omnibus/incorrect citation of statutory provisions – competence of appeal.
* Magistrates' Courts Act s.45(1)(b) – resident magistrate with extended jurisdiction "deemed" to be High Court judge does not alter the character of proceedings after formal transfer under s.256A CPA.
* Constitution art.107A(2)(e) – does not justify disregard of mandatory procedural requirements.
|
25 August 2015 |
|
Failure by the appellant to state the originating case number in the notice of appeal renders the appeal incompetent.
Criminal procedure – Appeal – Notice of appeal – Requirement under Rule 68(2) and (7) to state originating case number, date, judge and nature of decision – Omission renders notice incurably defective – Appeal incompetent and struck out; Court may raise competence suo motu under Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2).
|
25 August 2015 |
|
Sentence passed without a recorded conviction is illegal; trial and appellate judgments quashed and record remitted for proper judgment.
Criminal procedure – mandatory requirement to record conviction before passing sentence (ss.235(1) and 312(2) CPA); failure to convict renders judgment and sentence illegal and proceedings a nullity; appellate court’s revisional power under s.4(2) AJA to quash and remit for fresh judgment; directions regarding custody and backdating of sentence.
|
25 August 2015 |
|
Wrongly titled notice and confusing statutory citations rendered the notice of appeal defective and the appeal incompetent.
* Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Rule 68(1) Court of Appeal Rules: notice institutes appeal – correct court title mandatory.
* Transfer under section 256A Criminal Procedure Act – appeals from transferred matters must be titled from the court that tried the case.
* Interpretation of "deemed" status under section 45(1)(b) Magistrates' Courts Act – does not convert resident magistrate into a High Court judge for titling.
* Notice of appeal – specification of offence and section – over‑citation/mixed convictions fatal.
* Notice of appeal – failure to state whether appeal is against conviction or sentence – minor defect; substantial compliance allowed.
|
24 August 2015 |
|
The applicant's conviction was upheld on credible victim, medical and identification evidence; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law — Unnatural offence (sodomy) — Victim's testimony sufficient; medical and laboratory corroboration; identification at police station valid; identification parade not mandatory; cautioned statement admissible despite retraction; appellate deference to concurrent factual findings.
|
24 August 2015 |
|
Victim’s credible testimony sufficed to prove incest; appellate court upheld conviction and sentence.
* Criminal law – Sexual offences – Incest by male (Penal Code s.158(1)(a)) – knowledge of familial relationship required.
* Evidence – Rape/incest evidence – Victim’s testimony under Evidence Act s.127(7) may suffice if credible, even without corroboration.
* Appellate review – Concurrent findings of fact should not be disturbed absent misapprehension or miscarriage of justice.
|
21 August 2015 |
|
Omission to specify the person threatened in an (attempted) armed robbery charge renders the charge fatally defective.
Criminal law – Charge particulars – omission to specify person threatened in (attempted) armed robbery – fatal defect – essential element; fair trial and statutory requirements (Criminal Procedure Act s.132); retrial vs discharge – application of Fatahali Manji.
|
20 August 2015 |
|
An unequivocal guilty plea bars appeal against conviction unless statutory exceptions to s.360(1) CPA are shown.
* Criminal law – guilty plea – unequivocal plea – s.360(1) Criminal Procedure Act – exceptions in Rex v. Folder (appreciation of charge; intention to admit; legal sufficiency of admitted facts).
* Procedural fairness – trial court’s duty to ensure accused understands charge – language barrier claims considered and may be afterthoughts.
* Evidence – medical examination corroborating sexual intercourse; age issues to be raised timely.
|
20 August 2015 |
|
A defective notice of appeal omitting correct date and nature of order renders the appeal incompetent and is struck out.
Court of Appeal Rules, Rule 68(2) – Notice of appeal must state correct date, High Court judge and case number, and briefly the nature of the order appealed; failure to comply renders appeal incompetent – defective notice containing conflicting dates and wrong description of order – appeal struck out; leave to re‑institute subject to limitation rules.
|
19 August 2015 |
|
A notice of appeal failing to state the nature of the decision under Rule 68(2) renders the appeal incompetent.
Criminal procedure — Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 r.68(2) — Notice of appeal must state nature of conviction, sentence, order or finding — Failure to comply renders appeal incompetent and subject to striking out.
|
18 August 2015 |
|
Application for extension to file review struck out for wrong citation of the enabling rule; reapplication may be filed under the correct rule.
Court of Appeal procedure — extension of time to apply for review — improper reliance on Rule 47 instead of Rule 10 — wrong citation of enabling provision renders application incompetent — application struck out; applicant may reinitiate subject to limitation.
|
18 August 2015 |
|
Defective charge particulars and sentencing without conviction render the convictions null, warranting quashing and release.
Criminal law - charge particulars - misdescription of statute and failure to state child’s age; Criminal procedure - requirement to convict before sentencing (s.235(1) CPA); Evidence - child testimony admitted without voir dire requires corroboration; Appellate jurisdiction - quashing proceedings and ordering release where defects are fatal and retrial would prejudice the accused.
|
18 August 2015 |
|
A notice of appeal omitting correct statutory citations and origin is fatally defective; appeal struck out.
* Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Rule 68(2) Court of Appeal Rules – requirement to state nature of conviction, sentence and origin of order appealed against.
* Criminal procedure – Fatal defects in notice of appeal – wrong statutory citation and omission to indicate source statute – competency of appeal.
* Civil/criminal appeals – Misidentification of originating court – effect on competency – misnaming of presiding officer as minor defect.
* Competency – Incompetent proceedings must be struck out; right to re‑initiate subject to limitation.
|
17 August 2015 |
|
Wrong citation of the Rules (Rule 47) rendered the application for extension of time incompetent; Rule 10 is the correct provision.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time – Proper enabling provision – Rule 10 v. Rule 47 of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009; wrong citation of rule renders application incompetent.
|
17 August 2015 |
|
Defective charge and sentencing without conviction nullified proceedings; weak evidence made retrial prejudicial, appellant ordered released.
* Criminal law — Unnatural offence — Correct statutory citation: section 154(1) and (2) Penal Code (as amended) must be used; erroneous citation is fatal. * Criminal procedure — Particulars of charge — Age of child victim material where subsection prescribes specific punishment; omission is prejudicial. * Criminal procedure — Conviction must precede sentence (s.235(1) CPA); omission nullifies judgment and sentence. * Remedies — Where charge is fatally defective and prosecution evidence is weak/contradictory, retrial may be prejudicial and release may be ordered under revisional jurisdiction (s.4(2) AJA).
|
17 August 2015 |
|
Extension to file a review requires good cause, daily accounting of delay, and pleaded Rule 66(1) grounds; absence warrants dismissal.
Court of Appeal Rules 2009 — Rule 10 (extension of time) — requirement to show good cause and account for each day of delay; Rule 66(1) — extension to file review must plead grounds of review; review is not a second appeal; supporting documentary evidence (Registrar's letters, prison affidavits) required to substantiate delay.
|
14 August 2015 |
|
A notice of appeal failing Rule 68’s mandatory particulars is defective and renders the appeal incompetent, warranting striking out.
* Criminal procedure – Appeal – Notice of appeal – Mandatory contents under Rule 68: correct judgment date, High Court judge and case number, and brief statement of nature of order appealed – Non‑compliance renders notice defective and appeal incompetent.
|
14 August 2015 |
|
Rape conviction of a minor upheld: victim's testimony and corroboration proved penetration and identity; consent irrelevant.
* Criminal law – Rape – Elements: penetration, consent (irrelevant where complainant is under 18), identification of offender; * Evidence – Victim's testimony as primary evidence of rape and value of corroboration; * Procedure – Appellate review of sufficiency of evidence and proper consideration of defence (general denial).
|
14 August 2015 |
|
|
13 August 2015 |
|
Visual identification was unreliable; conviction quashed and appellant ordered released.
Criminal law – Sexual offences against a child – Visual identification — Requirement for detailed contemporaneous description; evidence must be watertight before acting on identification; contradictions in clothing descriptions may undermine identification.
|
13 August 2015 |
|
Non‑service of the proper respondent (and absence of DPP) breached the right to be heard; appellate proceedings were quashed.
* Criminal procedure – appeals from primary court – service and proper respondent – necessity to serve complainant or DPP where applicable. * Natural justice – right to be heard – failure to serve appropriate party nullifies appellate proceedings. * Statutory powers – DPP may take over or participate in appeals from primary courts (MCA ss.20,25; National Prosecutions Service Act s.10). * Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.4(2) – power to quash and set aside proceedings for procedural defect.
|
13 August 2015 |
|
Conviction based on unsafe visual identification was quashed for failure to eliminate possibility of mistaken identity.
Criminal law – Visual identification – Identification at scene must be detailed and contemporaneous; evidence of short glance, vague distance or inconsistent dress descriptions is unsafe; where mistaken identity is possible, doubts resolved for accused; conviction quashed.
|
12 August 2015 |
|
Appellate proceedings determined without serving the proper complainant breached natural justice; appellate judgments quashed and set aside.
Criminal appeals – appeals from primary court – party prosecution vs DPP intervention – requirement of DPP notice under s.34(1)(b)(iv) MCA – failure to serve proper complainant breaches right to be heard – appellate proceedings quashed under s.4(2) AJA.
|
12 August 2015 |
| April 2015 |
|
|
Application to set aside ex parte order was incompetent and time‑barred, thus rejected and struck out with costs.
Civil procedure – setting aside ex parte orders – proper provision: Order IX Rule 13; wrong citation of enabling rule renders application incompetent; time bars – amended Order VIII Rule 2 (GN No. 422/1994) imposes 21‑day limit for extension; jurisdictional/preliminary objections may be raised at any stage.
|
17 April 2015 |