Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

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.
Visit website
https://jmap.judiciary.go.tz/jmap/jmap-coa
6 judgments
Advanced search

Court registries

All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
6 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
September 1997
Zee Hotel Management Group Ltd and 3 Others vs Minister of Finance (Civil Appeal 19 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 41 (26 September 1997)
A judge who is functus officio cannot lawfully vary an earlier order without a review application and hearing of the parties.
Judicial review — functus officio — judge cannot suo motu vary earlier order without review application; procedural fairness — parties must be heard before varying orders; Immigration law — judicial direction to issue entry permits/special passes.
 26 September 1997
August 1997
Saide Salmin Ambar vs The Executive Secretary Wakf and Trust Commission, Zanzibar (Civil Appeal 48 of 1995) [1997] TZCA 52 (1 August 1997)
Court refused to depart from appeal rules and deemed notice withdrawn where leave to appeal was absent.
Civil procedure – Appeals – Requirement of leave to appeal and contents of record of appeal (Rules 76, 83, 89) – Effect of absent leave: appeal not instituted – Rule 3 discretion to depart from Rules in the interest of justice must protect both parties – Established practice: strike out or deem withdrawal of notice of appeal – Costs under Rule 84(a).
 1 August 1997
July 1997
Saleh Ameir Pandu vs S.M.Z (Criminal Appeal No. 180 of 1992) [1997] TZCA 98 (4 July 1997)
Convictions based on uncertain night-time identification were quashed as unsafe; remanding after bail at prosecutor’s request criticized.
* Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at night – Danger of unsafe convictions where identification is uncertain or conditions (darkness, fleeing crowds) impair reliability. * Appellate review – Misdirection by judge regarding facts not supported by record may vitiate decision. * Procedure – Impropriety of remanding accused after bail at prosecutor’s request in anticipation of appeal.
 4 July 1997
Salum Abdulkarim Natu and The Hon. Attorney General and Another (Civil Application 4 of 1996) [1997] TZCA 60 (4 July 1997)
Leave to appeal dismissed for challenging the wrong follow-up order instead of the original registrar's execution order.
* Civil procedure – Execution of decrees – Whether a lower court may order execution while an application for stay is pending before a superior court – Importance of challenging the correct order (registrar’s execution order versus later follow-up order of a judge).
 4 July 1997
Somji and Another v Minister of Housing and Lands (Civil Appeal 27 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 149 (4 July 1997)

(Appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Zanzibar at  Zanzibar, Dahoma J) Civil Practice and Procedure - Appeals - Requirements - Order Hl Rule 3 of the Zanzibar Civil Procedure Decree Cap 8

 4 July 1997
February 1997
Shabir F.A Jessa and Another vs Raj Kumar Deogra (Civil Appeal 59 of 1996) [1997] TZCA 56 (26 February 1997)
Representation that two persons are partners and a signed guarantee can render appellants jointly liable for unpaid goods.
* Contract law – Representation as partnership – Section 238(1) Law of Contract Decree – liability arising from conduct and representation. * Contract evidence – Written undertaking as guarantee – Exhibit PI held to be clear guarantee inducing delivery. * Evidence – Rejection of alleged receipts and documents as forged or irrelevant where authorship and materiality not established. * Civil procedure – Death of party after close of hearing – Order XXVI Rule 6 and Section 129 preserve proceedings; substitution of legal representative permitted.
 26 February 1997