|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2015 |
|
|
Failure to inform an accused of statutory defence rights and omission to enter a formal conviction render proceedings invalid.
* Criminal procedure – Accused’s rights under section 231 CPA – Duty to explain right to give evidence, call witnesses and produce exhibits – Failure amounts to breach of fair trial.
* Sentencing limits – Section 170(1) CPA – Subordinate courts’ maximum custody term – Illegal sentence exceeding statutory limit.
* Formal requirements of judgment – Section 235(1) and 312(2) CPA – Conviction must be entered and judgment must specify offence, statutory provision and punishment.
* Remedies – Quash and set aside defective proceedings; remit to trial court for compliant judgment; retrial only in interests of justice.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
Wrong statutory citation rendered the respondent's High Court application for certiorari incompetent and the proceedings null.
Administrative law — Judicial review — Certiorari — Requirement to properly move the court by citing the correct statutory provision — Wrong or inapplicable citation renders application incompetent and proceedings a nullity.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
High Court lacked pecuniary jurisdiction because the substantive special damages claim fell within magistrates' court monetary limits.
* Jurisdiction – High Court pecuniary jurisdiction – Article 108 Constitution – subject to other written laws. * Pecuniary jurisdiction determined by substantive claim (special damages), not general damages. * Civil Procedure Code s.13 – suit to be instituted in the court of lowest grade competent to try it. * Magistrates' Courts Act s.40(2)(b) – district/resident magistrate court monetary limits (Tshs.10,000,000)
|
11 December 2015 |
|
Conviction without statutory change of plea is void; proceedings quashed and retrial ordered from point of PW1’s completed evidence.
* Criminal procedure – Change of plea – Where accused initially pleads not guilty, a later admission requires compliance with s.228(1)–(2) CPA before conviction. * Failure to record statutory change of plea vitiates conviction and cannot be cured under s.388 CPA. * Remedy – quash conviction and sentence; order retrial from point of defect.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
Summary rejection for want of written notice was erroneous where oral/prison notice had been given; appeal restored.
* Criminal procedure – notice of intention to appeal – s.361(1) CPA – oral notice and prison officer's communication sufficing as notice.
* Criminal procedure – summary rejection of appeal – exceptional power to be exercised sparingly; natural justice considerations.
* Appellate jurisdiction – revisional powers – s.4(2) AJA – quashing and setting aside erroneous summary rejection and restoring appeal.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
A notice of appeal not complying with Form D and lacking proof of service renders the appeal incompetent and is struck out.
* Civil procedure – Appeal – Notice of appeal – Form D (Rule 83(6)) – notice must be addressed to the Court of Appeal of Tanzania and follow prescribed format. * Civil procedure – Appeal – Service and proof of service – Rule 84(1) and Rule 96(1)(b),(j) – failure to serve and include proof of service renders appeal incompetent. * Filing of a corrective notice does not cure defect where it was not served on respondent.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
Appellate court reduced manslaughter sentence after finding the trial judge relied on irrelevant extraneous considerations.
Criminal law – Manslaughter – Sentencing discretion of trial court – Appellate interference only where sentence manifestly excessive, based on wrong principle, or important circumstances ignored – Trial reliance on extraneous/irrelevant considerations justifies reduction of sentence.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
Failure to consider the defence denied a fair trial, leading to quashed conviction and substitution of theft conviction for co-accused.
Criminal law – armed robbery – defective particulars as to timing of force or threat; Right to fair trial – failure to consider defence vitiates conviction; Identification – not an issue where accused admits presence and gives explanation; Appellate revisional powers – quashing unsafe convictions and substituting lesser offences (theft).
|
9 December 2015 |
|
Preliminary objection dismissed; application for extension of time to be heard on its merits.
Civil procedure – preliminary objection – must raise a pure point of law on ascertained facts and, if sustained, dispose of the matter; objection cannot depend on contested facts or judicial discretion; Court of Appeal dismissed misconceived preliminary objection and ordered substantive application for extension of time to be heard on merits.
|
9 December 2015 |
|
Recent possession of the victim’s phone and credible identification sustained conviction; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – robbery – proof beyond reasonable doubt – doctrine of recent possession – unexplained possession of stolen property as presumptive evidence.
* Evidence – witness credibility – findings of trial court binding unless cogent reasons exist to reassess.
* Appeal – appellate interference – limits on disturbing factual findings of lower courts.
|
9 December 2015 |
|
|
8 December 2015 |
|
An eighteen‑year‑old convicted of gang rape must receive corporal punishment under section 131A(3), not imprisonment.
Criminal law – gang rape – admissibility of cautioned statement – objection not raised at trial; Sexual offences trials – requirement for in camera hearing under s.186(3) CPA – procedural irregularity but non‑prejudicial; Evidence – victim's testimony may suffice under s.127(7) Evidence Act; Sentencing – s.131A(3) Penal Code requires corporal punishment, not imprisonment, for persons of or under eighteen.
|
8 December 2015 |
|
Appellant's conviction set aside for unsworn witness evidence and assessors' improper cross‑examination; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — oath/affirmation — unsworn/unaffirmed evidence must be expunged; Record of evidence — High Court Rules require narrative recording; Assessors — may put questions through court but must not cross‑examine; Fair trial — assessors’ cross‑examination vitiates proceedings; Remedy — retrial ordered where interests of justice require it.
|
8 December 2015 |
|
|
7 December 2015 |
|
A purported preliminary objection is improper if it does not raise a pure legal point on ascertained facts and cannot dispose of the matter.
* Civil procedure – preliminary objection – requirements: must raise a pure point of law on ascertained facts and, if upheld, dispose of the matter; * Jurisdiction – extension of time to file notice of appeal – whether Court of Appeal may grant extension after High Court refusal to be decided on merits; * Preliminary objection – inadmissible where resolution requires consideration of conflicting authorities or exercise of judicial discretion.
|
7 December 2015 |
|
A defective notice of appeal failing Rule 68(2) renders a criminal appeal incompetent and subject to striking out.
Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Rule 68(1) & (2) Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules 2009 – Mandatory compliance – Defective notice renders appeal incompetent – Right to legal assistance for incarcerated appellants.
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Life sentence for manslaughter quashed as manifestly excessive; substituted four‑year term given unconsidered mitigating factors.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Manslaughter – appellate interference where sentence is manifestly excessive – need to consider mitigating factors (first offender, remand time, provocation, self‑defence, remorse, guilty plea) – maximum penalty reserved for worst offences – prohibition on reliance on extraneous/unsubstantiated considerations.
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Assessors are not permitted to cross‑examine; their doing so caused apparent bias and nullified the trial, ordering a retrial.
Criminal procedure – assessors’ role – assessors may put questions through the court (s.177 Evidence Act) but cannot lawfully cross‑examine witnesses (s.290 CPA); cross‑examination by assessors is apparent bias and vitiates trial. Criminal procedure – s.293 CPA – requirement to hear advocates on no‑case submission and to inform accused of right to give evidence and call witnesses; non‑compliance is irregularity potentially causing failure of justice.
|
3 December 2015 |
|
An appeal supported by an incomplete record is incompetent and will be struck out with costs.
Court of Appeal — Civil procedure — Competence of appeal — Record of appeal must contain all documents required by Rule 96(2)(c) — Missing High Court ruling on time-bar objection, missing exhibit and missing leave-to-appeal papers render appeal incurably defective — Appeal struck out with costs; liberty to refile subject to limitation.
|
3 December 2015 |
|
Victim's credible uncorroborated testimony and reliable identification upheld; appeal against rape conviction dismissed.
Criminal law – Rape – Conviction may rest on victim's uncorroborated testimony under s.127(7) Evidence Act if credibility assessed; visual identification and contemporaneous arrest; appellate deference to concurrent credibility findings.
|
3 December 2015 |
|
A charge omitting essential particulars under s.287A and s.132 CPA renders convictions null; retrial declined due to weak evidence.
Criminal law – Armed robbery (s.287A Penal Code) – Essential elements and particulars; Criminal Procedure Act s.132 – requirement to state particulars sufficient to inform accused; Defective charge rendering proceedings a nullity; Discretion to order retrial versus quashing conviction.
|
2 December 2015 |
|
Court found no fatal irregularity in the preliminary hearing, upheld the charge as attempted murder, and ordered immediate release on existing bail.
* Criminal procedure – preliminary hearing – alleged irregularity where accused purportedly pleaded to a different offence (murder) than charged (attempted murder) – whether such irregularity justified referral to Court of Appeal.
* Criminal procedure – committal and trial – role of information/charge as determinant of plea and validity of preliminary proceedings.
* Bail – continuation of previously granted bail where alleged procedural irregularity is found meritless.
|
2 December 2015 |
|
|
1 December 2015 |
|
Victim's credible testimony and appellant's confession upheld; rape conviction and 30-year sentence affirmed and appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Statutory rape – Proof may rest on prosecutrix’s credible testimony and accused’s unequivocal cautioned statement. * Evidence – Admissibility of cautioned statements – failure to object at trial and raising coercion for first time on appeal. * Procedure – Competence of minor witness – voir dire and oath. * Appellate procedure – Suitability for summary dismissal under s.4(4) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
1 December 2015 |
|
A defective notice of appeal that fails Rule 68 requirements renders a criminal appeal incompetent and is struck out.
Criminal procedure — Notice of appeal — Rule 68(1) & (2), Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules 2009 — Mandatory requirements; non‑compliance renders notice defective and appeal incompetent; notice of appeal institutes appeal; access to legal assistance for unrepresented appellants.
|
1 December 2015 |
| November 2015 |
|
|
Judgments delivered without hearing parties or without recorded statutory reasons are nullities and require quashing and retrial.
* Civil procedure – natural justice – court raising and deciding issue suo motu in judgment without hearing parties – audi alteram partem; judgment a nullity.
* Administrative remedy exhaustion – competence of suit where internal statutory remedy not pursued – effect on jurisdiction and need to hear parties.
* Criminal procedure – s.214(1) Criminal Procedure Act – re-assignment of partly heard trials – requirement to record reasons for predecessor's inability to complete trial.
* Procedural irregularity – proceedings and subsequent appeals founded on null proceedings are themselves nullities – power to quash and order retrial.
|
30 November 2015 |
|
Court quashed judgment because the trial judge decided a suo motu issue without hearing the parties, remitting the case for fresh hearing.
Civil procedure — Right to be heard (audi alteram partem) — Court cannot raise and decide an issue suo motu in judgment without hearing parties — Judgment founded on such procedure is a nullity; procedural competence — Non-exhaustion of administrative remedies — Proper remedy is striking out, not dismissal; remittal for fresh hearing.
|
30 November 2015 |
|
Successor magistrate completing a trial without recorded reasons under s.214(1) CPA renders proceedings a nullity and mandates retrial.
* Criminal procedure – Section 214(1) CPA – reassignment of partly heard trial – necessity of recording reasons for predecessor's inability to complete trial – successor magistrate's authority to act on predecessor’s record. * Irregularity rendering proceedings a nullity – incurable under section 388 CPA. * Appellate proceedings founded on void trial proceedings are void – remedy is quashal and retrial. * Revisional powers – section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – ordering retrial.
|
30 November 2015 |
|
Failure to record reasons under s.214(1) CPA makes a successor magistrate’s continuation of a trial a nullity; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – s.214(1) CPA – successor magistrate may only take over partly heard trial if record shows predecessor unable to complete trial or complete within reasonable time – absence of recorded reasons renders continuation and ensuing proceedings a nullity – s.388 CPA inapplicable to cure fundamental irregularity – appellate proceedings founded on null trial proceedings also null – retrial ordered under revisional powers (s.4(2) AJA).
|
30 November 2015 |
|
A court cannot decide a competence issue raised suo motu without hearing the parties; judgment was quashed and remitted.
Administrative/Constitutional Law – right to a fair hearing (Article 13(6)(a)) – court raising and deciding competence suo motu – exhaustion of internal remedies – misconceived suits should be struck out not dismissed – avoidance of res judicata.
|
30 November 2015 |
|
Convictions quashed where night-time visual identification lacked detail and was undermined by contradictions and delays.
Visual identification — Night-time identification requires proof of lighting intensity, room size and distance; Bare assertions insufficient; Contradictory witness accounts, delay in reporting/arrest and lack of recovered property undermine credibility; Court may re-evaluate unsafe convictions and invoke revisional powers to quash co-accused convictions.
|
27 November 2015 |
| October 2015 |
|
|
Failure to comply with section 299(1) and full change of assessors vitiated the trial; conviction and sentence quashed.
Criminal procedure — Transfer of trial judge — Duty to inform accused of rights under section 299(1) CPA; Assessors — requirement that assessors hear whole evidence (ss.265, 286, 287 CPA); Summing up — prohibition on judge expressing own views to assessors; Procedural irregularities vitiating trial and warranting retrial.
|
26 October 2015 |
| July 2015 |
|
|
An appeal founded on an incurably defective decree is incompetent and must be struck out; revisional powers may nullify such proceedings.
Civil Procedure Decree formality and contents Order XX rr.67 and Order XXXIX r.35 prescribed forms mandatory incurably defective decree vitiates appeal appeals founded on defective decrees incompetent revisional powers s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act to nullify proceedings.
|
22 July 2015 |
|
A review application re‑arguing evidential matters was dismissed and the 30‑year minimum sentence for armed robbery was upheld.
* Criminal procedure – Review jurisdiction – Rule 66(1): review limited to manifest error on face of record, denial of hearing, nullity, lack of jurisdiction, or fraud/perjury – not a rehearing of appeal.
* Evidence – Alleged contradictions and reliance on complainant’s former statement – matters for appeal, not review.
* Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act (as amended 1994) – armed robbery involving a dangerous weapon attracts minimum 30 years imprisonment.
|
16 July 2015 |
|
Review dismissed as a disguised rehearing; 30‑year minimum sentence for armed robbery with a weapon is lawful.
* Criminal procedure – review under Rule 66(1) – review not to be used for rehearing or re‑arguing decided appeals.
* Evidence – reliance on witness testimony and alleged prior statement – complaints recaptured on appeal are not review grounds.
* Criminal law – alibi rejection – findings of fact on credibility not disturbed on review absent Rule 66(1) grounds.
* Sentencing – Minimum Sentences Act (post‑1994) – armed robbery with a dangerous weapon attracts minimum 30 years.
|
16 July 2015 |
|
Appellant's conviction quashed where recent-possession and identification elements were not positively proved.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Doctrine of recent possession – Elements required: possession with suspect; positive identification of property; proof property stolen from complainant; recentness – Insufficiency of evidence defeats conviction.
|
8 July 2015 |
| June 2015 |
|
|
An appeal founded on an incurably defective decree is incompetent and may be nullified and struck out.
* Civil procedure – appeals – requirement that memorandum of appeal be accompanied by a copy of the impugned decree – Order XXXIX, rules 1(1) & 35(2). * Decree – must agree with judgment and comply with Form No.9 and Order XX, rules 6(1) & 7. * Incurably defective decree – renders appeal incompetent. * Court of Appeal – revisional powers under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act to nullify and set aside incompetent proceedings.
|
25 June 2015 |
|
Application for revision out of time dismissed for lack of good cause and availability of appeal.
* Civil procedure – summary procedure (Order XXXV CPC) – Rule 4 set-aside; * Land disputes – right of appeal under section 47(1) Land Disputes Courts Act; * Extension of time – requirement to show good cause for delay; * Revision inappropriate where adequate alternative remedies exist.
|
8 June 2015 |
|
Illness alone insufficient for extension; applicant must show review grounds and prospects under Rule 66(1)(a)–(e).
* Criminal procedure – Extension of time – Applicant must show good cause beyond delay (illness) and demonstrate prospects of success under Rule 66(1)(a)–(e) before extension granted.
|
8 June 2015 |
|
Court quashed murder conviction and ordered psychiatric examination where evidence raised reasonable doubt about appellant's sanity.
* Criminal law – Murder – Defence of insanity – Proper stage to raise insanity (plea-taking) – Court's discretion under section 220(1) Criminal Procedure Act to order medical examination where evidence suggests unsoundness of mind.
* Criminal procedure – Revisional jurisdiction – Quashing proceedings where trial court failed to order psychiatric examination despite indicia of mental disorder.
* Trial fairness – Duty of defence counsel to raise special defences at appropriate stage; consequences of failure to do so.
|
8 June 2015 |
|
Applicant failed to show good cause for delay; appeal or Rule 4 relief, not out‑of‑time revision, was the appropriate remedy.
* Civil Procedure Code Order XXXV – summary procedure – Rule 4 (setting aside summary decree); * Requirement to show good cause for extension of time for leave to file revision out of time; * Land Disputes Courts Act s.47(1) – availability of appeal in land disputes; * Practical utility of revision where alternative remedies exist.
|
5 June 2015 |
|
Leave to file a revision out of time was refused for lack of good cause and because an appeal was the proper remedy.
* Civil procedure — leave to file revision out of time — requirement to show good cause for delay; availability of alternative remedies.
* Civil procedure — summary procedure (Order XXXV CPC) — possibility of setting aside decree under Rule 4.
* Appeals — where an appeal is available, a revision (especially out of time) may be inappropriate and of no practical utility.
* Land law — land disputes and statutory remedies under the Land Disputes Courts Act (Cap. 216).
|
5 June 2015 |
|
Extension denied where illness was shown but applicant failed to demonstrate prima facie grounds or prospects of success.
Extension of time – Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 Rule 10 – requirement to show good cause; illness as cause of delay – need to demonstrate prima facie grounds/prospects of success for proposed review; evidentiary sufficiency of medical chit.
|
5 June 2015 |
|
Court discards unreliable confessions, upholds conviction on visual identification for one appellant, quashes others and corrects illegal sentences.
* Criminal law – identification evidence – recognition by victims who knew accused prior to offence – dock identification not applicable. * Criminal procedure – alibi notice under s.194 – must give sufficient particulars and be supported; failure to produce supporting evidence may render alibi unreliable. * Evidence – confessional/cautioned statements – contradictions and inconsistency with other evidence render them unreliable and of no weight. * Sentencing – minimum sentence for gang rape is life; appellate court may substitute lawful sentence where sentence is illegal.
|
5 June 2015 |
|
Illness and hospitalization constituted good cause to extend time to file written submissions; procedural non-citation was not fatal.
Civil procedure – extension of time – Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – illness and hospitalization as good cause; Rule 48(1) non-citation not fatal where substantive formalities met; discretion to waive time limits in interest of substantive justice.
|
5 June 2015 |
|
Failure to address assessors on voluntariness of confession and alibi and to record a proper conviction vitiated the trial; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — High Court trials with assessors — duty to sum up on all vital points of law (including voluntariness of confession and alibi) — failure to do so vitiates trial; Conviction must be entered before sentence (s.235(1) CPA) and judgment must specify offence and statutory provision (s.312 CPA); Missing summing-up or assessors' opinions in the record undermines ability to verify compliance; Remedy — quash and order retrial.
|
5 June 2015 |
|
Application partly struck out because the first applicant had died and was not properly represented at filing.
Civil procedure — application for extension of time and stay of execution — preliminary objection as to defective affidavits and locus of deceased applicant — representation of deceased estate — institution in proper capacity — striking out name of deceased applicant.
|
5 June 2015 |
|
Illness and hospitalization amounted to good cause to extend time for filing written submissions; Rule 48(1) non‑citation not fatal.
Court of Appeal procedure — extension of time under Rule 10; Formal application requirements — Rule 48(1) non‑citation not fatal where affidavit discloses grounds; Illness/hospitalization (stroke) as good cause to extend time for filing written submissions; Precedent on waiving strict compliance with Rule 106(1).
|
4 June 2015 |
|
Contradictory identification evidence and improperly relied recent possession and cautioned statements caused convictions to be quashed.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Doctrine of recent possession – Requirements for application and necessity of positive identification of stolen property; Visual identification – witness contradictions and credibility; Cautioned/confessional statements – statutory safeguards (Criminal Procedure Act ss.50,51) and inadmissibility if breached; Alibi supported by documentary evidence – duty to investigate authenticity.
|
3 June 2015 |
|
Conviction quashed where contradictory identification and improperly applied recent-possession doctrine made evidence unsafe.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification – contradictions in eyewitness evidence and failure to exhibit distinctive marks; Recent possession – requirements for application and proof; Admissibility – cautioned/confessional statements recorded in breach of statutory safeguards (s.50–51 Criminal Procedure Act) are illegal; Alibi evidence – documentary hospital records tendered without objection require proper testing before rejection; Conviction unsafe where identity not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
|
2 June 2015 |