|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2016 |
|
|
Extension of time granted because delay resulted from late grant and supply of requisite leave to appeal.
Civil procedure – Extension of time – Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – good cause; Delay caused by pending leave to appeal and late supply of leave; Leave to appeal as prerequisite under s.5(1)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Extension granted where delay was caused by late granting and late supply of requisite leave to appeal.
Appeal — Extension of time under rule 10 — Good cause shown where delay caused by late grant and supply of leave; Leave to appeal required under s.5(1)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act; Court’s discretion to extend time is unfettered.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Convictions quashed for arraignment irregularity, unsafe visual identification, improperly admitted cautioned statements, and defective recent-possession evidence.
Criminal procedure – mandatory plea after amendment of charge; Visual identification – necessity to describe light/intensity to eliminate mistaken identity; Cautioned statements – must be read after admission to afford challenge; Recent possession – requirements to prove ownership and recent theft; Revisional powers – quashing convictions where evidence and procedure defective.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Applicant’s review alleging ignored alibi and defective medical exhibits dismissed for failing to show manifest error.
* Review jurisdiction – Rule 66(1) Court of Appeal Rules – limited grounds: manifest error on face of record, denial of hearing, nullity, lack of jurisdiction, fraud/perjury; review not a rehearing. * Criminal appeal – alibi defence – whether failure to consider alibi constitutes manifest error. * Evidentiary weight – medical reports lacking doctor’s name – defect in documentary evidence and effect on conviction. * Sentencing – substitution of unlawful sentence under section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act; life imprisonment substituted for unlawful 30-year sentence. * Abuse of process – re-opening or re-arguing matters already decided not permitted.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Dismissal of an appeal without notice violated appellants' right to be heard; High Court order quashed and rehearing ordered.
Criminal Procedure Act — right to be present at appeal (ss. 363, 365, 366(2)) — natural justice — denial of right to be heard renders decision a nullity — summary dismissal without notice unlawful — re-hearing ordered.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Successor judge taking over without recorded reasons vitiates proceedings; matter remitted for retrial.
Civil procedure — Successor judge taking over a partly heard trial — Order XVIII r.10(1) CPC — Requirement to record reasons — Failure to do so vitiates proceedings; revisional power under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act; unsigned decree defect.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Successor judge’s unrecorded takeover of a partly heard trial vitiated proceedings; retrial ordered.
Civil procedure – Order XVIII r.10(1) CPC – Successor judge taking over partly heard trial must record reasons – Failure to record reasons vitiates proceedings – Revisional jurisdiction under s.4(2) AJA – Unsigned or improperly signed decree problematic.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Convictions quashed where amended charge lacked new pleas, visual ID was unsafe, cautioned statements improperly admitted, and possession evidence was deficient.
Criminal law – amendment of charge and taking pleas – failure to take pleas after substitution renders trial a nullity; Visual identification – requirement to describe nature/intensity of light to exclude mistaken identity; Cautioned/confession statements – must be cleared, admitted and read out so accused can respond; Recent possession doctrine – requires positive proof of ownership and identification (chassis/engine/peculiar marks); Retrial discretion – not ordered where prosecution case is fundamentally deficient.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Convictions quashed where amended charge pleas were not taken, visual ID and ownership evidence were unreliable, and cautioned statements were improperly used.
Criminal law – visual identification – adequacy of lighting details; cautioned/confessional statements – must be read out after admission; recent possession doctrine – requirement to prove ownership and identity of recovered property; amendment of charge – duty to read amended charge and take fresh pleas; retrial – not ordered where prosecution case is deficient.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Applicant’s review dismissed: review limited to narrow grounds; alleged alibi error and unsigned PF3 not manifest errors.
Criminal law — Review of appellate judgment — Rule 66(1) Court of Appeal Rules — Review limited to manifest error on face of record, denial of hearing, nullity, lack of jurisdiction, fraud — Alibi defence and admissibility/weight of medical report — Revisional correction of unlawful sentence under section 4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution evidence materially varied from charged date and failure to amend prejudiced the accused.
Criminal law – Rape – Material variance between charge particulars and evidence – Duty to amend under s.234 Criminal Procedure Act – Prejudice and unsafe conviction; alibi and unexplained delay in arraignment; failure to call police witnesses to corroborate arrest.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
|
28 October 2016 |
|
|
27 October 2016 |
|
Assessors' cross‑examination and non‑direction on alibi vitiated trial; unreliable identification led to quashing of conviction and release.
Criminal law – assessors' role – assessors must not cross‑examine witnesses; such conduct amounts to bias and vitiates trial; Trial procedure – failure to direct assessors on alibi is a fatal irregularity; Evidence – visual identification – reliability and corroboration required; Remedy – where trial is vitiated and identification unsafe, retrial may be refused and accused released.
|
27 October 2016 |
|
Extension to file notice of appeal denied for unexplained delay and insufficiently important legal points.
Court of Appeal – extension of time under Rule 10 to file notice of appeal; jurisdiction to extend time where High Court refused under s.11(1) AJA; requirement to account for delay and show diligence; significance threshold for points of law to justify extension; burden of proof in sale of goods (s.115 Evidence Act); High Court (Commercial Division) jurisdiction under High Court Registries Rules.
|
27 October 2016 |
|
Applicant failed to account for delay and advanced insubstantial points of law; extension of time refused.
* Civil procedure – Extension of time – Rule 10 Court of Appeal Rules – applicant must account for delay and show diligence; point of law must be of sufficient importance to justify extension. * Appellate procedure – Notice of appeal – Rule 83(1) – notice is a creature of the Rules and time for lodging may be extended in proper cases. * Evidence – burden of proof – governed by section 115 Evidence Act and shifts with circumstances. * High Court (Commercial Division) – appellate jurisdiction – established by High Court Registries Rules.
|
27 October 2016 |
|
|
27 October 2016 |
|
Omission to record a conviction is fatal; death sentence quashed and matter remitted for proper judgment.
Criminal procedure — requirement to record a formal conviction in High Court judgments; omission to enter conviction is a fatal irregularity; death sentence cannot be validly imposed absent a conviction; Court of Appeal power to quash and remit under s.4(2) AJA; sentencing and right to be heard in mitigation under s.314 CPA.
|
26 October 2016 |
|
A sentence (including death) is invalid if the trial court fails to enter a formal conviction before sentencing.
* Criminal procedure – High Court trials – requirement to enter a conviction before passing sentence – sections 282, 283, 298(3), 312(2) and 314 CPA. * Sentencing – invalidity of sentence passed without formal conviction. * Appellate jurisdiction – invocation of revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA to quash defective judgment and remit for proper judgment or retrial. * Fair hearing – constitutional requirement to ensure rights of accused to be heard and to have judgment properly recorded.
|
26 October 2016 |
|
Trial nullified for failure to direct assessors on alibi; sole eyewitness ID unreliable, conviction quashed and appellant released.
Criminal law – identification evidence – visual identification is inherently fallible and must be treated with caution; assessors must be directed on alibi – failure to direct assessors renders trial a nullity – unrebutted alibi and unsafe sole eyewitness identification may justify quashing conviction and refusing retrial.
|
26 October 2016 |
|
Failure to direct assessors on alibi rendered trial void; unreliable single eyewitness identification cannot sustain conviction.
Criminal law – Trial procedure – failure to direct assessors on defence of alibi renders trial a nullity; Eyewitness identification – single visual identification is inherently fallible and must satisfy strict reliability criteria before supporting conviction; Where identification evidence is unsafe and alibi unrebutted, retrial may be refused.
|
26 October 2016 |
|
Whether a murder conviction based solely on a single eyewitness identification is safe where an alibi was raised and identification conditions were unfavourable.
* Criminal law – Visual identification – Single eyewitness identification is inherently fallible and requires cautious scrutiny; prosecution must exclude reasonable misidentification. * Eyewitness evidence – Factors affecting reliability: observer’s capacity, event conditions, and identification procedures. * Criminal procedure – Defence of alibi and assessors’ direction.
|
26 October 2016 |
|
Transfer of judge and complete change of assessors without statutory safeguards vitiated the trial; conviction quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure — Transfer of judge — section 299(1) CPA — accused’s right to demand re‑summoning of witnesses; Assessors — sections 265, 286, 287 CPA — at least two assessors must hear whole evidence; Summing up — section 298(1) CPA — prohibition on judge expressing views that influence assessors; Fundamental procedural irregularities — trial nullity — revisional power under section 4(2) AJA — retrial ordered.
|
26 October 2016 |
|
Assessor cross‑examination breached impartiality, vitiated the trial; conviction quashed and appellant ordered released.
* Criminal procedure – trials with assessors – assessors must aid the court and remain impartial; they must not cross‑examine witnesses. * Evidence – cross‑examination is the preserve of the adverse party (s.146(2)); assessors’ cross‑examination breaches fair trial and rule against bias. * Remedy – material irregularity vitiates trial; conviction and sentence quashed; no retrial ordered where prosecution case is weak.
|
25 October 2016 |
|
Failure to take essential steps (such as applying for leave for a second land appeal) justified striking out the notice of appeal.
* Civil procedure – Court of Appeal Rules, Rule 89(2) – application to strike out notice of appeal for failure to take essential steps.
* Land law – Appeals under the Land Disputes Act – distinction between second and third appeals; section 47(1) (leave required) v. section 47(2) (certificate on a point of law).
* Essential steps – steps that advance the hearing (e.g., applying for leave where required) – misdirected applications do not advance prosecution of appeal.
|
25 October 2016 |
|
Credible child testimony, corroborated by medical reports, upheld some convictions despite expunged irregular cautioned statement.
Evidence — sexual offences against children; compliance with s.127(2) Evidence Act required: intelligence and understanding duty to tell truth; s.127(7) permits conviction on child's evidence alone if credible; cautioned statement inadmissible if not properly read out; identification issue — not dock identification when witnesses knew accused prior to dock.
|
25 October 2016 |
|
A trial court must expressly enter a conviction before sentencing; omission is a fatal irregularity warranting quashing and remittal.
Criminal procedure — requirement to enter a formal conviction before sentence — sections 282, 283, 298(3), 312(2), 314 CPA; omission to record conviction is fatal; sentencing without conviction invalid; revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA; remedy — quash judgment and remit or order retrial.
|
25 October 2016 |
|
Cautioned statement expunged; two child witnesses' unsworn evidence discarded for s.127(2) non‑compliance; convictions on three counts upheld.
Criminal law – Unnatural offences against children; admissibility of cautioned/confession statements – requirement to read statement after admission; child witnesses – mandatory requirements of s.127(2) Evidence Act and conviction on child victim testimony under s.127(7); medical (PF3) corroboration; limits on raising fresh grounds of dock identification.
|
25 October 2016 |
|
The applicant failed to justify extension of time; delay unexplained and relied points of law not sufficiently significant.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time under Rule 10 of the Court of Appeal Rules — discretion requires sufficient explanation for delay and proof of diligence. * Point of law — extension may be granted for significant legal questions or illegality of impugned decision, but not for settled or routine issues. * Evidence — burden of proof governed by section 115 of the Evidence Act; shifts with circumstances. * High Court (Commercial Division) — jurisdiction to hear appeals from subordinate courts governed by High Court Registries Rules and ordinarily settled.
|
25 October 2016 |
|
Successor judge’s failure to inform accused of right to resummon witnesses and assessors’ joint opinion vitiated trial; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – successor judge taking over trial – section 299(1) CPA – requirement to record reasons and inform accused of right to resummon witnesses – mandatory and jurisdictional; Assessors – section 298(1) CPA – separate opinions required; joint opinion vitiates proceedings; Remedy – partial nullification and retrial from takeover stage.
|
24 October 2016 |
|
|
24 October 2016 |
|
|
22 October 2016 |
|
Review application dismissed: no manifest error on the record and issues raised were outside the appealed case.
Review procedure – Rule 66(1)(a) Court of Appeal Rules – manifest error on the face of the record – test for manifest error (obvious/patent mistake) – scope of review limited to matters in the appealed record – sentencing irregularities and plea-taking challenges not grounds for review when not part of the appealed case.
|
22 October 2016 |
|
Failure to direct assessors on alibi rendered the trial nullity; sole eyewitness identification was unsafe, so conviction quashed and no retrial ordered.
* Criminal law – Visual identification evidence – inherent unreliability; courts must act with caution and examine circumstances of observation and witness credibility. * Criminal procedure – Defence of alibi – duty to direct assessors on alibi; failure renders trial a nullity. * Appeal – Re-trial discretion – where sole identification evidence is unsafe, re-trial may be refused.
|
22 October 2016 |
|
Omission to name the person subjected to violence in an armed robbery count renders the charge fatally defective.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Particulars of offence must identify person subjected to violence – omission is fatally defective; Evidence – theft as essential element of robbery must be proved; Appellate procedure – Revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA; Retrial – not ordered where prosecution seeks to fill evidentiary gaps.
|
21 October 2016 |
|
A defective robbery charge and lack of transfer order rendered convictions null, leading to quashing and the applicant's release.
Criminal law – armed robbery: charge must state person against whom threat or violence was directed; defective charge vitiates proceedings; appellate jurisdiction – formal transfer order under s.45 Magistrates' Courts Act required; inadequacy of identification evidence; Court's power under s.4(2) Appellate Jurisdiction Act to quash and set aside.
|
21 October 2016 |
|
A robbery charge must state who was subjected to the violence; failure to do so renders the charge defective and the proceedings irregular.
* Criminal law – Robbery – Particulars of offence – Essential to state the person against whom personal violence was used – prescribed form in Second Schedule to the CPA to be followed as nearly as possible.
* Criminal procedure – Charge sufficiency – Failure to give required particulars renders charge defective and proceedings irregular.
* Appeal – When appeal can be determined on a narrow point of defective charge without addressing other grounds.
|
21 October 2016 |
|
A defective robbery charge omitting the person threatened renders trial unfair; convictions quashed and retrial denied.
* Criminal procedure – particulars of offence – armed robbery – omission to state person against whom personal violence was used – fatal defect. * Criminal law – robbery – essential ingredient of stealing must be proved. * Appellate jurisdiction – exercise of revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA – quashing convictions where charge is fatally defective. * Retrial – considerations; retrial not ordered where prosecution would be allowed to fill gaps in evidence. * Conspiracy – requires at least two persons; co‑accused acquittal defeats conspiracy count.
|
21 October 2016 |
|
Victim’s credible testimony and lawful admission of unavailable witness’s statement upheld rape conviction despite absent birth certificate.
* Criminal law – Rape – Proof of offence primarily by victim’s credible testimony; medical evidence not always essential.
* Evidence Act s.34B(2) – Admissibility of written statements of unavailable witnesses where statutory procedure is followed.
* Appeals – Concurrent findings of fact – appellate courts should rarely disturb credibility findings but first appellate court must re‑evaluate evidence.
* Proof of age – Parental testimony can suffice to establish victim’s age where birth certificate is not produced.
* Criminal procedure – Alibi must be considered even if no formal notice given; court must give reasons for acceptance or rejection.
|
20 October 2016 |
|
A sentence (including death) passed without a recorded conviction is invalid and must be quashed.
Criminal procedure — Trial High Court must enter a conviction before passing sentence — Sentencing without conviction is a fatal irregularity — Validity of death sentence imposed absent conviction — Appellate revisional powers under s.4(2) AJA to quash and remit or order retrial.
|
20 October 2016 |
|
Trial was a nullity where judge ignored unanimous assessors and prosecution failed to prove recent possession of stolen property.
Criminal procedure – trials with the aid of assessors – mandatory consideration of assessors' opinions (s.265, s.298(1) CPA) – failure to consider or to record reasons for disagreeing with unanimous assessors renders trial a nullity; Criminal law – doctrine of recent possession – requirements: accused found with property, property positively identified as complainant's, recent theft, and that the item constitutes subject of charged offence – burden on prosecution to prove all elements.
|
19 October 2016 |
|
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution under Rule 4(2)(a) after appellant became untraceable and abandoned the appeal.
Civil procedure — Appeal — Dismissal for want of prosecution — Appellant untraceable and appears to have abandoned appeal — Power under Rule 4(2)(a) Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 — Liberty to re‑institute.
|
19 October 2016 |
|
A trial judge’s failure to account for unanimous assessors’ opinions renders the trial a nullity and convictions unsafe.
Criminal procedure – Trials with assessors – Mandatory involvement of assessors; judge’s duty to take assessors’ opinions into judicious account and to record reasons when disagreeing. Criminal law – Doctrine of recent possession – requirements: possession by suspect, positive identification of property as complainant’s, recent theft and that the item is the subject of the charge. Conviction vitiated where assessors’ opinions are ignored or distorted and where recent possession elements are not proved.
|
19 October 2016 |
|
Victim’s credible testimony, admissibility of unavailable witness statement under s.34B(2), and parental proof of age upheld; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Rape: credibility of complainant and concurrent findings; Evidence Act s.34B(2) – admissibility of statement of unavailable witness; proof of victim’s age – parental testimony vs birth certificate; materiality of medical evidence and delay in reporting; treatment of alibi on appeal.
|
18 October 2016 |
|
Convictions quashed where sole eyewitness was unreliable and preliminary‑hearing exhibits were inadmissible.
Criminal law – murder – sufficiency of evidence – reliance on single eyewitness – witness credibility, consistency and improbability – preliminary hearing procedures – inadmissibility of documents not read and explained to accused – failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
18 October 2016 |
|
Appellants' murder convictions quashed because sole eyewitness was unreliable and key exhibits were improperly admitted.
Criminal law – single eyewitness evidence – credibility, contradictions and improbabilities – danger of convicting on uncorroborated solitary testimony; Procedure – preliminary hearing – improper admission of documents (rules 4 & 6 GN No.192/1988) – effect: exhibits discounted; Burden of proof – prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; Evidence Act s.143 – quality not quantity of witnesses.
|
17 October 2016 |
| May 2016 |
|
|
Intended exhibits not formally tendered and endorsed cannot be relied on; proceedings quashed and retrial ordered.
* Evidence – Documentary exhibits – Required formal tendering and judicial admission; documents filed as "intended exhibits" do not automatically become evidence.
* Commercial Court Rules – Lacuna filled by Civil Procedure Code under Rule 2(2).
* Civil Procedure Code O. XIII r.4 and r.7 – Endorsement of admitted documents and rule that only admitted documents form part of the record.
* Procedural non-compliance – Substantial compliance and absence of prejudice may justify overlooking technical breaches.
* Remedies – Expungement of improperly admitted documents; quash proceedings and order retrial; exercise of revisional powers.
|
31 May 2016 |
|
Failure to formally tender and endorse documentary exhibits under CPC invalidated the High Court's reliance on them; retrial ordered.
Civil procedure — Commercial Court Rules 2012 — witness statements and "intended exhibits" — admission of documents — lacuna filled by Civil Procedure Code (Order XIII Rules 4 and 7) — endorsement of admitted exhibits — appellate review and revisional powers to quash proceedings and order retrial.
|
31 May 2016 |
|
Intended exhibits not formally tendered, admitted and endorsed cannot form part of the record; retrial ordered.
* Commercial Court Rules 2012 – lacuna filled by Civil Procedure Code (O. XIII) – admissibility and endorsement of documentary exhibits. * Documentary evidence – ‘‘intended’’ exhibits filed with witness statements are not automatically admitted; formal tender, judicial admission and endorsement required. * Failure to admit/endorse exhibits – expunction and retrial. * Non-compliance with procedural rules that causes no prejudice may be overlooked.
|
31 May 2016 |
|
|
30 May 2016 |