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.
5 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
5 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
December 1987
Electrifying a garden to deter theft that causes death amounts to manslaughter; conviction and 10‑year sentence upheld.
Criminal law – manslaughter versus murder; liability for death caused by deliberate electrified trap; inference of knowledge from location of connection; credibility of third‑party blame; sentence proportionality.
30 December 1987
Appeal allowed: court found self-defence and provocation justified, quashing the manslaughter conviction and sentence.
* Criminal law – Manslaughter – Sufficiency of evidence to sustain conviction. * Criminal law – Self-defence – Availability where accused acted fearing for life and household safety. * Criminal law – Provocation – Effect in reducing or negating criminal liability. * Appeal – Quashing conviction where trial judge wrongly excluded available defences.
30 December 1987
A guilty plea is ineffective where a defective charge omits unlawfulness and the court fails to explain essential ingredients.
* Criminal law – Manslaughter (death while driving) – essential ingredient is unlawful act or omission (culpable negligence). * Guilty plea – must be informed; court must explain essential ingredients and record plea in accused's own words. * Procedure – Adan v R followed: if accused disputes material facts, change plea to not guilty and hold trial. * Defective information – omission of unlawfulness renders plea ineffective; conviction unsafe; retrial ordered.
30 December 1987
Ambiguous reproachful words do not constitute incitement to murder; second appellant acquitted, first appellant’s conviction upheld.
* Criminal law – Murder – Joint enterprise and incitement – Whether reproachful or ambiguous words constitute incitement or counselling to kill; * Words as incitement – must be capable of only one meaning as a call to commit the offence; * Evidence – Past conduct and surrounding circumstances insufficient to infer agreement or joint intention without clear evidence of counselling or incitement.
10 December 1987
Circumstantial evidence and corroborated witness accounts upheld a murder conviction; the appellant's alibi failed to raise reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – murder; circumstantial evidence sufficiency and exclusivity; alibi — burden to raise reasonable doubt; corroboration of partly inconsistent witness testimony; conduct after offence as probative circumstance.
10 December 1987