|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| April 2026 |
|
|
Appeal allowed where lower courts ignored the applicant's defence and a key cautioned statement was inadmissible.
Criminal law — admissibility of cautioned statement — compliance with section 51(1) CPA; Oaths and affirmations — irregular oath not fatal (s.9 Oaths Act); proof of age and identification by recognition; duty to consider accused’s defence — failure is fatal; adverse inference from prosecution’s failure to call material witnesses
|
17 April 2026 |
|
Ambiguous charge particulars and inconsistent victim testimony led to the appellant’s rape conviction being quashed.
Criminal procedure — sufficiency of charge (s.135 CPA) — ambiguous particulars; Sexual offences — credibility of child complainant — inconsistencies in successive accounts; Proof of age — variance and failure to amend charge; Duty to consider defence evidence; Conviction quashed for failure to prove offence beyond reasonable doubt
|
15 April 2026 |
|
Variance between charge and witness evidence on date required amendment; failure to amend rendered the prosecution case unproved.
Criminal law – grave sexual abuse – material variance between charge and evidence as to date – amendment of charge under section 251 CPA required – failure to amend renders charge unproved; Criminal procedure – defence of alibi – notice and particulars may be furnished any time before closure of prosecution case (section 200(5) CPA) – alibi raising reasonable doubt
|
15 April 2026 |
| March 2026 |
|
|
Whether respondents repaid the loan in full; Court held outstanding principal TZS 678,884,673.08.
Banking law — loan recovery — evidential weight of bank statements and pay-in slips versus internal bank computation; guarantors' liability under guarantees; appellate re-examination of factual findings on first appeal.
|
27 March 2026 |
|
Non-joinder of necessary beneficiaries rendered the proceedings null and void; matter remitted for rehearing with proper parties joined.
Civil procedure — Non-joinder of necessary parties — Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC — Necessary party defined — Violation of right to be heard — Proceedings null and void — Remittal for fresh hearing.
|
27 March 2026 |
|
Interpleader is a special suit; failure to follow Order XXXIII vitiated proceedings and required retrial.
Interpleader suits – special procedure – Section 69 and Order XXXIII CPC – discharge of stakeholder – making claimant plaintiff in lieu of stakeholder – procedural irregularity vitiates proceedings – remittal for retrial.
|
27 March 2026 |
|
Non-joinder of a necessary third party in a banking payment dispute vitiates proceedings; retrial ordered with the party joined.
Civil procedure — Necessary party — Non-joinder of a necessary party vitiates proceedings — Order 1 rule 10(2) CPC — Bank payment by SWIFT — joinder and retrial.
|
27 March 2026 |
|
Appeal struck out: grievances were factual challenges, not questions of law under section 26(2) TRAA.
Tax law – Withholding tax on services and equipment – Appeals from Tax Revenue Appeals Tribunal limited to questions of law (s.26(2) TRAA) – Burden of proof under s.18(2)/s.19(2) – Appellate review not permitted on factual findings or reweighing of evidence – Incompetent appeal struck out with costs.
|
27 March 2026 |
|
Rape conviction upheld on victim testimony and confession; impregnating‑schoolgirl charge not proved.
Criminal law – Rape (statutory rape) – elements: penetration, identity, age – victim's testimony and medical evidence – caution statement admissibility and weight – impregnating a schoolgirl charge: proof of paternity and reasonable doubt – DNA evidence raised first on appeal not considered.
|
5 March 2026 |
|
Insufficient identification and failure to call material witnesses defeated proof beyond reasonable doubt, leading to quashed conviction.
Criminal law — Identification — Visual identification unsatisfactory where lighting and sleeping arrangements not proved; Circumstantial evidence — victim unconscious during incident; Evidence — failure to call material witnesses permits adverse inference; Proof — prosecution must prove identity beyond reasonable doubt in sexual/unnatural offence cases.
|
5 March 2026 |
|
Failure to call a crucial three‑year‑old victim deprived prosecution of proof of penetration; conviction quashed.
Evidence — Competence of witnesses — Tender age — Trial court must assess competence of child witness in court; prosecution obliged to call crucial witnesses; failure to call child witness permits adverse inference; penetration must be proved beyond reasonable doubt in rape charge.
|
5 March 2026 |
|
A material variance between the charge date and evidence, unamended, was fatal and warranted quashing the conviction.
Criminal law – variance between charge particulars and evidence – failure to amend charge under the Criminal Procedure Act – fatal to prosecution; second appeal – entertain new point of law.
|
5 March 2026 |
|
Conviction quashed because particulars (date) conflicted with evidence and prosecution failed to amend the charge under section 251(1).
Criminal law – Rape – Variance between particulars (date) and evidence – Failure to amend charge under s.251(1) Criminal Procedure Act – Charge unproven; identification and PF3 relevance noted.
|
5 March 2026 |
|
The appellant's conviction was quashed because the evidence varied from the charge and the prosecution failed to amend it.
Criminal law – Sexual offence – Variance between charge and evidence – Duty to amend charge under s.251(1) Criminal Procedure Act – Applicability of Selemani Makumba when complainant cannot identify time of offence – Conviction quashed.
|
4 March 2026 |
|
Night-time torchlight identification and defective parade/charge particulars rendered proof beyond reasonable doubt absent.
Criminal law — Visual identification — Reliability at night using torches — Identification parade procedures — Compliance with PGO 232 (paras S and N) — Mistaken identity caution — Proof beyond reasonable doubt — Specificity of charge (place of offence).
|
4 March 2026 |
|
Conviction quashed where victim's dock identification without prior identification parade rendered identification unreliable.
Criminal law – Identification of accused – Dock identification without prior identification parade – inadmissible/unsafe; failure to call material witness – adverse inference; proof beyond reasonable doubt in rape prosecutions.
|
4 March 2026 |
|
Failure by a child witness to promise to tell the truth rendered her evidence valueless; retrial order misdirected.
Evidence Act (s.127/135) – child witness promise to tell the truth – failure renders evidence valueless (pre‑2023 amendment) – retrial vs expungement – appellate revision under s.6(2) AJA – insufficiency of remaining evidence to sustain rape and HIV transmission convictions.
|
4 March 2026 |
|
A guilty plea is equivocal and conviction invalid where facts read do not disclose the offence's essential elements.
Criminal law — Plea of guilty — Equivocal plea — Facts read must disclose all elements of the offence — Rape: ingredients (penetration, place, reporting, PF3/clinical exam) — Prosecution cannot cure defective facts post‑plea by relying on investigation dockets (Fatehali Manji).
|
4 March 2026 |
|
Victim’s testimony, a child of tender age, recorded without statutorily required promise/oath, was expunged and conviction quashed.
Evidence Act s.135(2) — child of tender age — promise or establishment of understanding of oath required; non-compliance renders evidence without evidential value (pre-amendment); sexual offence — victim's evidence as best evidence; conviction unsafe if penetration not proved.
|
4 March 2026 |
|
Court allowed appeal: prosecution evidence undermined by contradictions, irregular PF3s, and misapprehension of the appellant's alibi.
Criminal law — Sexual offences — Proof beyond reasonable doubt; identification by victim; corroboration — inconsistencies in witness accounts; PF3 and medical examination irregularities; misapprehension of evidence; alibi evaluation.
|
3 March 2026 |
|
Conviction for attempted rape quashed because night identification was unsafe and the alleged seized shirt was not tendered.
Criminal law – Attempted rape – visual identification at night – necessity of adequate lighting, opportunity to observe and description – failure to tender seized shirt – misapprehension of facts by appellate court – conviction unsafe.
|
3 March 2026 |
|
Conviction quashed for child rape due to inadequate identification and unsworn defence evidence.
Criminal law — Evidence — Unsworn testimony of accused — No evidential value; Identification — visual identification must be supported by description or parade; Burden of proof — remains on prosecution; Remission — inappropriate where it would permit prosecution to fill gaps.
|
3 March 2026 |
|
Appellants' convictions overturned where confessions and identification evidence were expunged and prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – murder – circumstantial evidence and ‘‘last seen’’ doctrine – identification of accused by single witness – admissibility and procedural propriety of cautioned and extrajudicial statements – committal proceedings non‑compliance and expunction of evidence – failure to call material witnesses and adverse inference.
|
2 March 2026 |
|
The applicant's conviction quashed where night‑time identification lacked stated aids, undermining proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law — Identification by recognition — Night‑time identification — Failure to state source of light or other aids — Misapprehension of evidence — Proof beyond reasonable doubt — Conviction quashed
|
2 March 2026 |
| February 2026 |
|
|
Convictions quashed where remains were not conclusively identified and key statements were inadmissible, failing proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Murder – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Identification of deceased – Reliance on clothes and uncalled identifying witnesses – Postmortem evidence – Forensic linkage (DNA) – Cautioned statements recorded out of time – Extra-judicial statement admissibility – Contradictory accounts of scene of crime.
|
27 February 2026 |
|
Material variance between charge particulars and evidence, without amendment under s.234 CPA, quashes conviction.
Criminal law – armed robbery – material variance between charge particulars and prosecution evidence – identification and valuation of stolen property – discrepancy in weapon description – necessity to amend charge under section 234 CPA – failure to amend is fatal to prosecution case.
|
27 February 2026 |
|
The appellant's conviction, based on flawed visual identification and an expunged confession, was unsafe and quashed.
Criminal law — Identification parades — Requirement of prior detailed description and compliance with PGO 232 — Dock identification — Expunged cautioned statement cannot support conviction — Proof beyond reasonable doubt
|
27 February 2026 |
|
Conviction quashed where inconsistent victim testimony and failure to call material witnesses left prosecution’s case unproven.
Criminal law — Sexual offences — Burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt; Victim’s testimony — credibility and consistency; Failure to call material witnesses — adverse inference; Medical report (PF3) — provenance and linkage to accused; Evaluation of evidence on appeal
|
26 February 2026 |
|
Failure to amend a charge after nolle prosequi vitiates trial; poor identification evidence precludes a safe retrial.
Criminal procedure — nolle prosequi — duty to amend/substitute charge; Fair trial — defective charge — right to plead; Identification — prior description and parade irregularities — visual ID of strangers; Retrial — Fatehali Manji — when retrial is inappropriate
|
25 February 2026 |
|
Conviction for possession of khat upheld; sentence reduced to five years for failure to consider mitigation and first-offender status.
Criminal law – illicit trafficking/possession of narcotic drugs (khat) – proof beyond reasonable doubt: seizure, certificate of seizure, cautioned statement, chemist report; Oaths – affirmation without stating religion not fatal; Sentencing – discretion, consideration of mitigation, reduction by appellate revisional powers
|
25 February 2026 |
|
An equivocal guilty plea omitting essential admissions renders convictions unsafe and requires fresh plea-taking.
Criminal law — plea of guilty — unequivocal plea — elements of offence — accused's comprehension and admission of ingredients — admission of exhibits after plea — armed robbery.
|
25 February 2026 |
|
Material variance between charge and evidence led the court to quash conviction for failure to prove offence beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – material variance between charge and evidence – duty to amend charge – burden of proof on prosecution – identification and tender of seized exhibits – remedy: quash conviction and set aside sentence
|
25 February 2026 |
|
Noncompliance with committal rules and Chief Justice Guidelines rendered key confession and exhibits inadmissible, quashing the conviction.
Criminal procedure — committal requirement (s.163(2) CPA) — failure to read and explain exhibits — exclusion of real evidence; Extrajudicial/cautioned statements — compliance with Chief Justice Guidelines and admissibility — justice of the peace identification, presence/absence of police, bodily inspection, recording delay; Doctrine of recent possession — reliance defeated when underlying exhibits are inadmissible; Proof beyond reasonable doubt — conviction quashed where core evidence expunged
|
25 February 2026 |
|
Non‑compliance with section 263 CPA (reading witness statements and addressing the accused) invalidates committal and trial, requiring fresh committal.
Criminal procedure — Committal proceedings — Requirement under section 263 CPA to read and explain information, witness statements and documents to the accused — Necessity to address accused under section 263(3) — Mere listing of witnesses/exhibits insufficient — Non‑compliance renders committal order and subsequent trial proceedings invalid — Remedy: nullification, quash conviction, remit for fresh committal.
|
23 February 2026 |
|
Conviction quashed where visual identification was unreliable and confessions were irregularly admitted in breach of trial-within-trial procedure.
Criminal law – Visual identification – Waziri Amani requirements (lighting, distance, duration) – failure to name at earliest opportunity (Marwa Wangiti); Confessions – cautioned and extrajudicial statements – trial-within-trial procedure – Twaha Ali and Seleman Abdallah requirements – improper tendering/reading during mini-trial – unfair trial; Burden of proof – prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
23 February 2026 |
|
Cautioned statement improperly recorded and expunged; conviction and death sentence quashed for lack of evidence.
Criminal law – Cautioned statement – Recording procedure under sections 58 and 59 Criminal Procedure Act – Distinct mandatory modalities for police-recorded and suspect-written statements – Verification and certification requirements – Handwriting and format discrepancies – Expungement of unsafe confession – Lack of corroborative evidence – Conviction quashed
|
23 February 2026 |
|
A premature finding of guilt at the case-to-answer stage vitiated the trial, requiring nullification and remittal for proper continuation.
Criminal procedure – amendment of information – absence from physical record not fatal if amendment properly made and available on court record; Criminal procedure – ruling on case to answer – trial court must not declare guilt before hearing defence; Irregularity vitiating proceedings – nullification and remittal for continuation of trial.
|
23 February 2026 |
|
Appellant failed to prove respondents published alleged defamatory statements; contradictions and lack of evidence led to dismissal with costs.
Defamation — Publication — Burden of proof on balance of probabilities — Material contradictions in witness testimony defeat proof of publication — Vicarious liability insufficient without evidence of agent's publication — First appellate court’s duty to re-evaluate evidence.
|
4 February 2026 |
|
Taxpayer must produce documentary evidence to discharge onus under TRAA; oral testimony alone is insufficient, assessment upheld.
Tax law – Burden of proof in tax appeals – Section 18(2)(b) TRAA – Taxpayer must produce documentary evidence to discharge onus – Assessment prima facie evidence of liability – Oral testimony insufficient where documents are available or demanded
|
4 February 2026 |
|
Whether the respondent validly terminated the applicant for gross dishonesty after accepting transfer benefits and refusing refund.
Labour law – unfair dismissal – gross dishonesty – transfer benefits accepted then refusal to refund – procedural irregularity did not negate substantive fairness – right to be heard absent evidential support – appellate restraint under section 58 LIA against re-evaluating concurrent factual findings.
|
4 February 2026 |
| January 2026 |
|
|
A bank may set off a matured fixed deposit against a guarantor’s debt where guarantee, demand notice, and general lien exist.
Guarantee and indemnity – demand notice to guarantor – matured fixed deposit receipt becomes general balance – bank's general lien and right of set-off – objection to undervaluation not raised below cannot be entertained on second appeal.
|
20 January 2026 |
|
Mortgage deed is a separate contract; borrower was not a necessary party and striking out was improper; amendment/impleader was the correct remedy.
Land law – mortgage distinct from loan agreement – non-joinder of borrower not necessarily fatal; Order 1 r.9 and r.10 CPC – amendment/impleader appropriate remedy for non-joinder of necessary party; burden of proof of repayment may be discharged by evidence other than by joining borrower.
|
20 January 2026 |
|
Appeal struck out as time barred: excluded delay runs to Registrar's notification/collection date, not certificate issuance.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Time limitation under rule 90(1) Court of Appeal Rules 2009 — Certificate of delay — Excluded period runs to Registrar's notification/collection date — Delay in collecting documents and filing appeal renders appeal time barred.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Failure to record and justify dissent by a Tribunal Vice‑Chairperson under s.20 TRAA renders the judgment invalid.
Tax law — withholding tax on payments to non‑residents; Double Taxation Agreements — conflict with domestic withholding provisions; Administrative/tribunal procedure — s.20 Tax Revenue Appeals Act requires recording of differing members' opinions and reasons for disagreement; failure to comply is fatal and warrants quashing and remittal.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Whether the High Court erred by awarding 12 months' compensation instead of the appellant's claimed 60 months for unfair termination.
Employment law – unfair termination – compensation – section 40(1)/41(1) ELRA (minimum twelve months) – discretionary power to award higher compensation – appellate interference limited to misdirection, improper consideration, omission, or wrong conclusion – regulation 32(5) considered.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
The appellants sold a property not listed as security; court held it was not security and dismissed the appeal with costs.
Land law — security for loan; written loan agreement and letter of offer control; Evidence Act — best evidence rule for written contracts; compliance with DLHT Regulation 3(2) (application particulars); nullification of unlawful auction and restitution to purchaser; tribunals' power to grant consequential relief.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
The appellant's challenge to the Declaration of Trust's illegality and unfair prejudice was dismissed with costs.
Company law — Declaration of Trust — Unfair prejudice (s.236 Companies Act) — Non‑joinder and necessary parties (Order 1 r.9 CPC) — Company secretary's acts in official capacity — BRELA not a necessary party.
|
19 January 2026 |
|
Court held executing court acted without jurisdiction and denied the purchaser right to be heard, ordering remittal and costs.
Execution law; Order XXI rules 87–90 CPC; Proclamation of Sale; functus officio; right to be heard; natural justice; judicial vs administrative order; revision jurisdiction.
|
19 January 2026 |
| December 2025 |
|
|
Whether the CMA may admit fresh evidence not tendered at the employee's disciplinary hearing.
Labour law – Disciplinary proceedings – Rule 13(5) of the Code of Good Practice – Scope limited to internal disciplinary hearings; CMA as quasi-judicial body may admit fresh evidence – CMA proceedings under ELRA are fresh hearings, not appeals from disciplinary committees
|
8 December 2025 |
|
Failure to serve the letter requesting appeal documents within 30 days renders the appeal time-barred and struck out.
Civil procedure – Appeal time-limits – Service of letter requesting copies of proceedings on respondent within 30 days – Rule 90(3) – Pre-amendment settled law – Certificate of delay – Overriding objective principle cannot cure failure to comply with mandatory time limits.
|
8 December 2025 |