|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| February 1995 |
|
|
|
28 February 1995 |
|
Appellate court affirms no-case ruling where prosecution evidence was materially contradictory and firearm identification unproven.
Criminal law – Submission of no case to answer – court entitled to rule where prosecution evidence is manifestly unreliable or materially contradictory. Evidence – Identification of weapon – necessity of adequate identification procedures and corroboration when firearm alleged. Appeal – appellate court to affirm trial credibility findings unless unsupportable. Criminal procedure – charge particulars must conform to evidence; prosecution bound by particulars. Curable clerical errors – heading errors do not vitiate decision where substance unaffected.
|
28 February 1995 |
|
Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case of threatening with a gun due to material contradictions and poor identification.
Criminal law – Threatening violence – Whether prosecution proved a prima facie case to require defence to be called – Material contradictions and insufficient identification of weapon. Evidence – Identification of objects and witnesses’ ability to identify a firearm under challenging circumstances. Appellate review – Deference to trial court credibility findings unless irrational. Criminal procedure – Need to align charge particulars with evidence; amendment where variance exists.
|
28 February 1995 |
|
|
28 February 1995 |
|
|
28 February 1995 |
|
|
28 February 1995 |
|
Where civil judgments resolved ownership, criminal charge for obtaining property by false pretences was unjustified and conviction quashed.
Criminal law – obtaining goods by false pretences – effect of prior civil judgments on criminal liability; delay in prosecution; claim of right and conditional discharge.
|
27 February 1995 |
|
A defendant cannot be guilty of obtaining money by false pretences where the payor knowingly paid to trap him.
Criminal law – Obtaining money by false pretences – Element of deception at time of parting with money; Evidence – Primary documentary proof required for documentary transactions; hearsay inadmissible absent Evidence Act s.67 exception; Entrapment/trap – where payor knowingly pays to effect arrest there is no operative deception; conviction may be substituted for attempt (Penal Code s.302; Interpretation Act s.51).
|
24 February 1995 |
Evidence - Admissibility - Unstamped document - Issue of admissibility of unstamped document raised on appeal- Whether proper. |
24 February 1995 |
|
Convictions quashed where prosecution failed to call a key witness and evidence was inconsistent and inadequate.
Criminal law – housebreaking and theft – insufficiency and inconsistency of evidence – failure to call key witness in whose house stolen goods were found – no proof of breaking – benefit of doubt – convictions quashed.
|
24 February 1995 |
|
A High Court as second appellate court may re‑examine evidence afresh and was justified in refusing a certificate and leave to appeal.
Civil procedure – Appeals from primary courts – Role of High Court as second appellate court – entitlement to examine whole evidence afresh and to make independent findings of fact and law. Procedure – Certificate and leave to appeal – requirements for points of law worthy of consideration by the Court of Appeal.
|
24 February 1995 |
|
Evidence of adultery (flagrante delicto and confession) upheld; appeal dismissed and each party to bear own costs.
Family law – Adultery – Proof by flagrante delicto and confession – damages for adultery – customary/community settlement (ten‑cell leader) – assessment of credibility on appeal.
|
24 February 1995 |
|
Applicant's defamation claim failed for lack of proof of publication and substantiation of alleged damages.
Defamation – requirement of proof of publication to identifiable third parties; failure to call witnesses of publication fatal to claim. Evidence – damages and loss must be proved; unsupported assertions of harassment and farm loss insufficient. Judicial findings – trial judgments containing references not on record or extraneous material are unreliable on appeal.
|
23 February 1995 |
|
Individual village members lacked standing to sue for company property; company, not individuals, must bring such claims.
Company law; locus standi – shareholders' capacity to sue – Articles of Association defining shareholders as villages, not individuals; representative/derivative actions – requirement of company co-plaintiff or court leave; exception for derivative suits alleging fraud; property of company belongs to the company and only it may sue.
|
23 February 1995 |
Customary Law — Brideprice - Refund of — Principles governing refund - Customary Law Declaration Order GN No 279 of 1963. |
22 February 1995 |
|
Appellate court upheld robbery conviction, finding eyewitness identification credible and dismissing the appeal.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Eyewitness identification – Whether identification was properly evaluated by trial court – Circumstances supporting recognition (known person, sufficient light, proximity during struggle) – Appeal dismissed.
|
22 February 1995 |
|
Appeal dismissed: land found in Mwiringo village and village allocation to respondent lawful absent malice or dispossession.
Land law – village land allocation; jurisdiction of village authority to allocate land; factual determination of land location; limits on allocation: no malice, no unlawful dispossession; appeal dismissed with costs.
|
22 February 1995 |
|
Insufficient and uncorroborated evidence of assault could not prove causation of death; accused had no case to answer and were acquitted.
Criminal law — murder charge — sufficiency of evidence to call accused to answer — causation of death — uncorroborated accomplice evidence — necessity for independent corroboration.
|
21 February 1995 |
|
|
20 February 1995 |
|
Night-time identification and unexplained arrest delay can render convictions unsafe if prosecution fails to exclude reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – identification evidence – recognition at night – reliability and opportunity to observe. Criminal procedure – effect of delay between offence and arrest on safety of identification and conviction. Standard of proof – beyond reasonable doubt – sufficiency of evidence to support conviction.
|
20 February 1995 |
|
Conviction for unlawful possession of heroin upheld on credible police and chemist evidence; sentence challenged as excessive.
Criminal law – unlawful possession of dangerous drugs – sufficiency of evidence to prove possession; search and seizure based on informer tip conducted in daylight before police detectives; forensic analysis identifying heroin hydrochloride. Sentencing – whether a fifteen-year term is excessive and merits reduction.
|
20 February 1995 |
|
Taxation of costs must be done by the High Court Registrar where a matter commenced in Primary Court but ended in High Court.
Civil procedure – Taxation of costs – Proper forum for taxation where matter commenced in Primary Court but concluded in High Court – Taxation to be conducted by District Registrar of High Court (Dodoma) – Proceedings in lower courts declared nullity where taxation wrongly performed.
|
17 February 1995 |
|
Taxation of costs for a Primary Court matter must be by the High Court District Registrar; lower taxation is null.
Civil procedure – Taxation of costs – Proper forum for taxation where matter commenced in a Primary Court and ended at the High Court – Advocates Remuneration and Taxation of Costs Rules GN. P. 515 of 1991 – jurisdictional error renders proceedings a nullity.
|
17 February 1995 |
|
The appellants' appeals against burglary and stealing convictions and sentences were dismissed and the trial court's orders upheld.
Criminal law – Burglary and stealing – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Sufficiency of evidence – Sentences not disturbed; appeals dismissed.
|
17 February 1995 |
|
|
17 February 1995 |
|
Unexplained 1½‑year delay in obtaining judgment copy does not justify extension of time to appeal; application dismissed with costs.
Enlargement of time to appeal – sufficient cause – burden on applicant to give satisfactory chronology and explanation for delay – prospects of success relevant but not decisive – inordinate unexplained delay justifies refusal of extension.
|
16 February 1995 |
|
An applicant must show sufficient cause for delay; prospects of success do not excuse inordinate unexplained delay.
Civil procedure – extension of time – applicant must show sufficient cause and provide credible chronology for delay; prospects of success relevant but subsidiary; failure to obtain copy of judgment not excusing inordinate delay.
|
16 February 1995 |
|
Possession of heroin held an economic, non-bailable offence under section 35 of the Economic and Organised Crime Control Act.
Criminal law — Possession of heroin — Whether the offence is an economic offence — Application of s.35, Economic and Organised Crime Control Act 1984 (as amended) — Non-bailable offence.
|
15 February 1995 |
|
Leave to appeal out of time refused where appellant failed to show an arguable appeal despite possible reasonable cause.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal out of time – applicant must show reasonable cause for delay and that the intended appeal is arguable; divorce – sufficiency of evidence of irretrievable breakdown; remedies in primary court under Marriage Act (ss.114(1),115(1)(e),130(1)).
|
14 February 1995 |
|
Leave to appeal out of time requires both a reasonable explanation for delay and an arguable appeal; appeal dismissed.
Civil procedure – leave to appeal out of time – applicant must show reasonable explanation for delay and that the intended appeal is arguable; failure on either ground defeats application. Family law – decree of divorce – evidence of irretrievable breakdown, prolonged separation and respondent's cohabitation supported granting divorce. Procedural fairness – absence of copy of judgment does not alone validate an out-of-time appeal if the appeal has no arguable merit.
|
14 February 1995 |
|
Conviction for defilement quashed where complainant’s identification lacked corroboration and alibi was credible.
Criminal law – Sexual offences – Defilement – Need for corroboration of complainant’s identification – Medical evidence of intercourse insufficient alone to identify perpetrator – Alibi evidence undermining weak identification.
|
13 February 1995 |
|
|
12 February 1995 |
|
A low purchase price alone does not establish guilty knowledge for receiving stolen property; conviction quashed.
Criminal law – Receiving stolen property – Guilty knowledge – Whether low purchase price alone proves knowledge that goods were stolen – Circumstantial evidence and contradictions in valuation – Benefit of doubt.
|
10 February 1995 |
|
Guilty plea upheld; three-year sentence affirmed, but corporal punishment set aside for lack of statutory authority.
Criminal law – guilty plea – conviction on plea of guilty; Sentencing – corporal punishment – cannot be imposed absent express statutory authorization; Penal Code s.225.
|
8 February 1995 |
|
Appeal allowed where a divorce decree was effectively entered ex parte without notice or opportunity for the respondent to be heard.
Family law – Divorce – Adjournment for reconciliation – Resumed hearing conducted without respondent’s appearance or clear service – Ex parte decree – Application to set aside – Procedural fairness – Remedy: rehearing before another magistrate; costs each party.
|
8 February 1995 |
|
Appellate court reduced an excessive two-year sentence for possession of illicit brew to time served and ordered immediate release.
Criminal law – Possession of illicit brew (gongo) – Sentence – Whether custodial sentence excessive – Reduction on appeal; mitigation considered: loss of employment and time served.
|
8 February 1995 |
|
Failure of the President of a General Court-Martial to take the mandatory oath rendered the proceedings a jurisdictional nullity.
Military law – Courts-martial – Convening authority – Defence Forces Committee’s appointment of conveners; Judge-Advocate role – advisory not decisional; Jurisdictional formalities – mandatory oath of President under Regulation C.112; Failure to comply renders proceedings a nullity; No retrial where sentence served.
|
8 February 1995 |
|
Appeal against conviction upheld but sentence increased to statutory minimum; land-trespass acquittal upheld and title disputes left to civil suit.
Criminal law — shopbreaking and stealing — defective charge sheet — omission of statutory reference curable; right of defence — explanation required before accused gives defence; cautioned statement admissibility and sufficiency of other evidence; exhibits entrusted for safekeeping — no miscarriage of justice where produced when needed; sentencing — Minimum Sentences Act applies where stolen property exceeds threshold; Criminal procedure v. civil remedy — land title disputes and damage claims should be resolved in civil actions, not by substituting criminal convictions.
|
8 February 1995 |
|
Conviction quashed: undocumented store handovers and lack of direct evidence left reasonable doubt about theft.
Criminal law – Theft – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Conviction unsafe where custody handovers undocumented and direct evidence lacking. Evidence – Inferences from conduct – Reporting loss and inquiries may support innocence. Criminal procedure – Appellate review – Quashing conviction where reasonable doubt persists.
|
8 February 1995 |
|
Failure to administer the mandatory oath to the court‑martial president deprived the court of jurisdiction, rendering proceedings a nullity.
Military law – court‑martial procedure – mandatory oath for President and members – Regulation C.112(1) and Reg.112.05 – condition precedent to jurisdiction; failure to comply renders proceedings nullity. Convening authority – valid delegation to Chief of Staff – convening order lawful. Role of Judge‑Advocate – advisory/supervisory role does not equate to participation in judicial determination.
|
8 February 1995 |
|
|
7 February 1995 |
|
Appeal allowed where appellant proved purchase and entrustment of a cow not forming part of the deceased's estate; lower courts' decisions quashed.
Property recovery – ownership of livestock – proof of purchase and entrustment; distinguishing personal property from decedent’s estate; appellate review of factual findings.
|
7 February 1995 |
|
Confessions procured by torture and weak identification/recovery evidence cannot support a robbery conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Robbery with violence – Confessions obtained by torture inadmissible – Identification evidence must be clear and particularised – Circumstantial evidence must exclude reasonable doubt – Appellate intervention where prosecution declines to support conviction.
|
3 February 1995 |
|
Appellate court refuses to entertain new factual allegations not present in trial record; appeal dismissed.
Land dispute – ownership and possession – appeal – appellate court will not entertain new factual allegations or witnesses absent from trial record – inconsistencies and lack of evidence warrant dismissal.
|
3 February 1995 |
|
Appeal allowed: divorce decree made in the respondent’s absence was ex parte and the matter must be reheard before another magistrate.
Family law – divorce – ex parte decree – whether divorce order made in absence of respondent where no service appears on record – setting aside irregular/ex parte orders – rehearing before a different magistrate.
|
2 February 1995 |
|
Animals bearing the judgment debtor’s brand were lawfully attached; appeals dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Attachment of property – Proof of ownership by brand/mark and admissions – Lawful attachment in favour of decree-holder; Appeal against attachment dismissed.
|
1 February 1995 |
|
Appeals dismissed where attached livestock bore the judgment‑debtor’s brand and ownership was admitted.
Civil procedure – Attachment of property – Livestock bearing judgment‑debtor’s brand – Brand marks and admissions as evidence of ownership – Lawful attachment by decree‑holder – Appeals dismissed with costs.
|
1 February 1995 |
|
Conviction for criminal trespass upheld where forged sale documents, contradictory defence evidence, and silence defeated any honest claim of right.
Criminal law – Criminal trespass (s.299 Penal Code) – Honest claim of right – Forged/altered sale documents – Credibility of defence witnesses – Adverse inference for failure to testify (s.231(3) Criminal Procedure Act) – Conditional discharge as lawful non-custodial sentence.
|
1 February 1995 |