|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2017 |
|
|
A DPP's s36(2) written certificate denying bail binds the court; reasons for the certificate are not required.
Criminal procedure – Bail – DPP's certificate under s.36(2) EOCCA – Effect and requirements; statutory test: written certificate; states likely prejudice to safety/interest; relates to pending criminal proceedings; no requirement to disclose reasons; authority: Ally Nuru Dirie; DPP v. Li Ling Ling.
|
14 December 2017 |
|
An appeal against a non-existent judgment (instead of a ruling from an originating summons) is incompetent.
Civil procedure – originating summons: decision is a ruling and drawn order, not a judgment and decree; Appeal procedure – notice and memorandum must correctly identify the decision appealed against; Court of Appeal Rules (Rule 83(3) & (6)) – non-compliance renders appeal incompetent; Distinction between 'judgment' and 'ruling' is substantive, not interchangeable.
|
8 December 2017 |
|
A stay application filed after the appeal period without extension is incompetent and is struck out.
Court of Appeal (Zanzibar) – Stay of execution – Time limits – Rule 11(2)(c) Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – Application filed after appeal period without extension deemed incompetent and struck out – Court may raise timeliness suo motu.
|
6 December 2017 |
|
A revision application lacking the full High Court record is incompetent and will be struck out, with no order as to costs.
* Civil procedure – Revision jurisdiction – Applicant must supply full record of proceedings from the High Court (proceedings, chamber summons, affidavits, drawn order) – omission renders revision application incomplete and incompetent; Court may strike out. * Revision procedure – Party moving Court cannot pick and choose parts of record; revision requires examination of entire lower court record.
|
6 December 2017 |
|
A revisional application is incompetent if the full lower court record, including the plaint and written statement of defence, is not filed.
Revision — competency — requirement to file complete record including pleadings; omission of plaint and written statement of defence renders revisional application incompetent; Rule 106 and appellate practice; Court raised competency suo motu.
|
6 December 2017 |
|
A notice of criminal appeal failing to state the nature of the order under Rule 68(2) renders the appeal incompetent.
* Criminal procedure – Notice of appeal – Rule 68(2) Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 – mandatory requirement to state briefly the nature of the conviction, sentence, order or finding; failure to comply renders the notice defective and the appeal incompetent; consequence: appeal struck out.
|
5 December 2017 |
|
Failure to file an affidavit in reply is discretionary and does not automatically permit ex parte determination; oral reply and inter partes hearing allowed.
Court of Appeal — Civil procedure — Rule 56(1) Court of Appeal Rules — Affidavit in reply discretionary — Failure to file affidavit bars challenging averments by affidavit but does not preclude oral response — Ex parte determination not automatic — Inter partes hearing ordered.
|
4 December 2017 |
|
A notice of appeal that fails to state the nature of the order appealed against is incurably defective and the appeal is incompetent.
* Criminal procedure – Appeal – Notice of appeal – Mandatory requirement under Rule 68(2) to state briefly the nature of the order, finding, sentence or conviction appealed against – Failure to comply renders the notice incurably defective and appeal incompetent.
|
4 December 2017 |
| November 2017 |
|
|
Omission of mandatory documents from the record of appeal renders the appeal incompetent and leads to striking it out.
* Civil procedure - Appeal competence - Record of appeal - Mandatory inclusion of pleadings and proceedings under Rule 96(2) and Rule 96(1)(c),(d),(k).
* Appellate practice - Failure to include required documents is fatal to an appeal; leave required to exclude documents.
* Preliminary objections - Court may raise and decide competence suo motu.
* Succession/substitution - objection where appeal is pursued against a deceased person without substitution.
|
30 November 2017 |
|
Omission of mandatory documents from the record of appeal renders the appeal incompetent and is ground for striking it out.
Court of Appeal — Competence of appeal — Record of appeal must include documents required by Rule 96(1) and (2) — Failure to include necessary pleadings and proceedings renders appeal incompetent and liable to be struck out — Court may raise such defects suo motu.
|
29 November 2017 |
| June 2017 |
|
|
Criminal revision struck out because the supporting affidavit failed to disclose the applicant's representative capacity.
Criminal revision – Section 372 Criminal Procedure Act – Supporting affidavit must disclose the applicant and maintain consistent representative capacity throughout – Defective affidavit renders application incompetent and liable to be struck out – Preliminary objections.
|
28 June 2017 |
| May 2017 |
|
|
Primary Court lacks jurisdiction over negligence claims; High Court suo motu reviewed and ordered continuation in District Court.
Magistrates' Courts Act – jurisdiction – Primary Court lacks jurisdiction over torts (negligence) – Section 18 and First Schedule; Civil procedure – suo motu review under section 44(1)(a) – correction of jurisdictional error; Transfer/continuance – matter ordered to proceed in District Court.
|
17 May 2017 |
| April 2017 |
|
|
Applicant failed to show exceptional circumstances for bail pending appeal after conviction; application dismissed.
* Criminal procedure — Bail pending appeal — After conviction applicant must show exceptional or unusual circumstances to obtain bail; presumption of innocence no longer applies.
* Bail — Applicant’s assertions of no risk to public order, residence and sureties insufficient to discharge burden.
* Appellate considerations — Court should avoid prejudicial premature assessment of appeal merits when considering bail.
* Procedure — Section 368(1) CPA bail application does not require attachment of trial proceedings or judgment.
|
27 April 2017 |
|
Extension of time granted because alleged illegality in the judgment constituted sufficient cause despite counsel's lapse.
• Appellate procedure – extension of time under Section 11 Appellate Jurisdiction Act – exercise of judicial discretion.
• Appeal practice – striking out for non‑compliance with Court of Appeal order – right to institute fresh appeal or seek extension.
• Grounds for extension – allegation of illegality in impugned decision constitutes sufficient cause.
• Conduct of counsel – negligence/non‑compliance is not automatically sufficient reason to refuse extension where illegality is raised.
|
27 April 2017 |