Court of Appeal of Tanzania

This is the highest level in the justice delivery system in Tanzania. The Court of Appeal draws its mandate from Article 117(1) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. The Court hears appeals  on both point of law and facts for cases originating from the High Court of Tanzania and Magistrates with extended jurisdiction in exercise of their original jurisdiction or appellate and revisional jurisdiction over matters originating in the District Land and Housing Tribunals, District Courts and Courts of Resident Magistrate. The Court also hears similar appeals  from quasi judicial bodies of status equivalent to that of the High Court. It  further hears appeals  on point of law against the decision of the High Court in  matters originating from Primary Courts. The Court of Appeal also exercises jurisdiction on appeals originating from the High Court of Zanzibar except for constitutional issues arising from the interpretation of the Constitution of Zanzibar and matters arising from the Kadhi Court.

Physical address
26 Kivukoni Road Building P.O. Box 9004, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.
12 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
12 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
October 2007
The applicant's rape conviction was upheld; credible eyewitness and victim evidence sufficed despite missing medical and other witnesses.
Criminal law — Rape — Eyewitness and victim credibility — Friendship between witnesses not decisive; Evidence Act s.143 — no prescribed number of witnesses; Criminal Procedure Act s.240(3) — maker of medical report may be summoned but absence does not always vitiate case; concurrent findings of fact — appellate restraint.
10 October 2007
September 2007
Watertight visual identification in broad daylight can sustain conviction despite concerns about identification parade or initial non‑description.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification – Requirements for reliable visual identification where incident occurs in broad daylight and witnesses have ample opportunity to observe. * Criminal procedure – Identification parade – Necessity and probative value; parade not essential where visual identification is watertight. * Evidence – Failure to describe suspects to police does not automatically invalidate subsequent reliable visual identification.
13 September 2007
August 2007
Eyewitness identification at night upheld; appellant's alibi rejected and armed robbery conviction affirmed.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification – Reliability of in‑scene identification where there was light and prolonged opportunity to observe – Waziri Amani criteria applied. * Criminal procedure – Defence of alibi – relevance and compliance with statutory notice (s.194(4) & (5)). * Appeal – concurrent findings of fact – no interference where eyewitness evidence accepted as credible.
27 August 2007
Appeal dismissed: identification, recent possession and absence of grocery witnesses did not undermine conviction.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – visual identification – application of Waziri Amani tests – recent possession doctrine – failure to call particular witnesses does not automatically attract adverse inference.
24 August 2007
Identification at night and reliance on a co-accused’s uncorroborated confession rendered the conviction unsafe.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – identification evidence at night (torch and moonlight) – reliability of voice identification; Evidence Act – admissibility and weight of co-accused’s confession (s.33(1) and s.33(2)) – prohibition against conviction solely on co-accused confession; misapplication of accomplice provision (s.142); defective charge – curable irregularity under Criminal Procedure Act.
24 August 2007
A ten-year sentence for manslaughter was not manifestly excessive; the applicant's appeal against sentence is dismissed.
Criminal law – Manslaughter – Sentence – Whether ten-year term was manifestly excessive – Plea of guilty and first offender mitigation – Limits of appellate interference with sentencing discretion.
24 August 2007
A properly recorded, voluntarily made repudiated caution statement can sustain a murder conviction absent independent corroboration.
* Criminal law – Murder – Repudiated/ retracted caution statement (confession) – voluntariness – trial-within-a-trial – corroboration not strictly required but prudence demands corroboration in material particulars – detailed confession may suffice to ground conviction.
24 August 2007
Appellate court reduced a manifestly excessive 15‑year manslaughter sentence to seven years for failure to consider mitigation.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Manslaughter – Appellate interference where sentence is manifestly excessive, error in principle, or failure to consider material mitigation; first‑offender and familial circumstances relevant to mitigation.
24 August 2007
Reported
The appellant's acts short of penetration constituted attempted rape; conviction and sentence upheld.
Criminal law — Rape — penetration requirement; Attempt — section 380 Penal Code — overt acts manifesting intention; Interruption by third party does not negate attempt; Conviction for attempted rape upheld on facts.
24 August 2007
Co‑accused confessions cannot alone sustain conviction; prior judicial rulings on voluntariness are estopped from re‑litigation.
Criminal law – Confessions – Caution and extra‑judicial statements by co‑accused – Confession by co‑accused not permissible sole basis for conviction (s.33 Evidence Act) – Retracted confession requires independent corroboration or judicial satisfaction it ‘must be true’.; Evidence – Voluntariness of statement – issue estoppel prevents re‑litigation where same question previously decided between same parties.; Identification and recovery of weapons as possible corroboration of confessions.
23 August 2007
Interlocutory orders in criminal proceedings are not appealable or revisable; reference dismissed and trial to proceed.
Criminal procedure – interlocutory order – order overruling objection to prosecutor – not finally disposing rights – appeals/revision barred by Written Laws (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No.3) Act, 2002 and Criminal Procedure provisions; manifest error on face of record and jurisdictional defects must be clear to override statutory bar; matter to proceed to trial.
15 August 2007
Application for extension of time and leave to appeal was incompetent and struck out for failure to first apply to the High Court.
* Civil procedure — Competence of application to Court of Appeal — Rule 44 requires applications for extension of time/leave to be first made to the High Court. * Appeals — Leave to appeal — Court may grant leave based on some grounds though not all advanced. * Appellate Jurisdiction Act — s5(1)(c) and s5(2)(c) — distinction regarding certification of points of law by the High Court.
13 August 2007