|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 1994 |
|
|
Minister’s exemption of parastatal premises from Rent Restriction Act held intra vires and constitutionally permissible; ordinary courts can check arbitrary rents.
Rent Restriction Act — Ministerial power to exempt "any premises or class of premises" — GN 41/92 exempting parastatal-owned premises — intra vires; Constitutional challenge — alleged discrimination and ouster of tribunal jurisdiction — ordinary courts remain available; Exemption not equivalent to amendment of parent Acts; Judicial review available against unconscionable rent increases.
|
9 November 1994 |
|
Reported
Rent Restriction – Powers of the Minister to grant exemption – Section 2(1)(b) of the Rent Restriction Act, 1984.
Administrative Law – Ultra vires Doctrine – Whether Government Notice 41 of 1992 granting exemption to the National Housing Corporation was ultra vires – Exemptions – Specified parastatal instead of a class of premises as provided by s 2(1)(c) of the Rent Restriction Act, 1984.
Constitutional Law – Whether GN 41 of 1992 was discriminatory, contrary to article 13(2) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania.
Constitutional Law – Whether GN 41 of 1992 was arbitrary - contrary to natural justice and equality before the law.
Constitutional Law – Drafted in so few terms as to not even targeted groups – Whether saved by article 30(2) of the Constitution. |
9 November 1994 |
| September 1994 |
|
|
Honest belief that victim was a witch does not excuse murder absent sudden loss of self‑control or physical basis for belief.
Criminal law – Homicide – Murder – Honest belief in witchcraft – Such belief does not negate murder absent sudden loss of self‑control and must be based on physical, not metaphysical, grounds; Extra‑judicial confession and post‑mortem establishing strangulation.
|
20 September 1994 |
Criminal law - Murder - Witchcraft - As a defence to murder - when witchcraft can constitute a defence to a charge ofmurder |
20 September 1994 |
| August 1994 |
|
|
Reported
Criminal Law - Murder - Malice Aforethought - Whether malice Aforethought may he inferred from the amount of force used - Whether conduct may be indicative of malice. |
17 August 1994 |
|
Appeal against murder convictions dismissed: intoxication defence rejected because evidence showed appellants capable of forming intent.
* Criminal law – murder – defence of intoxication – whether intoxication negates mens rea or produces insanity; assessment of evidence of drunkenness and capacity to form intent.
* Appellate review – credibility and factual findings of trial judge – deference where findings are supported by evidence.
* Conduct during assault (planning, duration, deliberate actions) as evidence of capacity to intend to kill or cause grievous harm.
|
12 August 1994 |
|
Reported
Civil Practice and Procedure - Claim for loss of profits - Need for specific proof of specific claims - Burden of proof. |
9 August 1994 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Trial with assessors - Assessors not given opportunity to cross-examine witnesses individually - Effect thereof
Evidence - Confession made involuntary - Circumstances of confession not seriously and comprehensively considered by the court - Whether proper.
Evidence - Corroboration - Uncorroborated retracted confession - Whether courts may convict on a retracted confession without corroboration. |
1 August 1994 |
|
Reported
Criminal Law — Murder - Contradictions in evidence regarding circumstances in which deceased was killed — Whether may be relied on for conviction of murder. |
1 August 1994 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Identification of an accused - Identification in conditions not favourable - Whether reliable. |
1 August 1994 |
|
Assessors’ procedural irregularity did not vitiate trial; detailed retracted confession sufficed to uphold murder conviction.
Criminal law – murder – assessors’ participation – irregular joint cross‑examination by assessors; retracted confession – voluntariness and sufficiency – corroboration desirable but not required; conviction may rest on a retracted confession if court satisfied of its truth.
|
1 August 1994 |
| July 1994 |
|
|
Reported
Evidence - Evidence of a child of tender years - Whether such evidence may he received without a voire dire - Section 127(2) of the Evidence Act 1967.
Evidence - Evidence of a child of tender years - Corroboration - Whether a child’s evidence may be corroborated by the defence evidence of the accused.
Criminal law - Robbery with violence - Appropriate sentence for robbery with violence - Sections 285 and 286 of the Penal Code, and the Minimum Sentences Act 1972 as amended by Act No. 10 of 1989. |
25 July 1994 |
|
Reported
Criminal Practice and Procedure - Appeal - Summary dismissal of appeal - Whether summary dismissal of appeal without re-appraisal of evidence proper. |
25 July 1994 |
|
High Court erred in summary dismissal; evidence raised reasonable doubt, so appellant's conviction was quashed and sentence set aside.
Criminal law – housebreaking – identification evidence – adequacy of reappraisal on appeal – summary dismissal of appeals – possession of stolen property and admissions – reasonable doubt – conviction unsafe.
|
25 July 1994 |
|
Child complainant's admissible evidence and corroboration sustained conviction; 30-year sentence, corporal punishment and restitution affirmed.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Evidence of child complainant – Voir dire under s.127(2) Evidence Act – Admissibility where child demonstrates sufficient intelligence; Identification evidence – corroboration by injuries and conduct; Sentencing – application of Minimum Sentences Act (Act No.10 of 1989) – mandatory custodial and corporal punishment; Restitution order.
|
25 July 1994 |
| June 1994 |
|
|
High Court erred by summary rejection; possession of stolen T‑shirt raised reasonable doubt and conviction was quashed.
Criminal law — housebreaking — possession of alleged stolen property — effect of possession and explanation on culpability; identification evidence and its weight; appellate review — impropriety of summary dismissal where evidence requires re-appraisal; conviction unsafe where reasonable doubt exists.
|
15 June 1994 |
| January 1994 |
|
|
Reported
Civil Practice and Procedure - Change of judge before concluding the trial - Whether proper - Order 17 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code 1966.
Labour Law - Summary dismissal of employee - Meaning of 'employee' in cases of summary dismissal - Sections 4 and 28(1) of the Security of Employment Act 1964 as amended by Act No 45 of 1969.
Labour Law - Meaning of 'employee' under the Security of Employment Act 1964 - Whether the opinion of the Labour Officer is binding on the court. |
1 January 1994 |