|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| May 2002 |
|
|
Default judgment set aside where trial court failed to comply with procedural requirements of Order VIII rule 14.
Civil Procedure – Default judgment – Order VIII r.14 – Requirements for summary judgment and ex‑parte proof – Necessity of a court order fixing time for filing defence, written application for ex‑parte proof, and proof of service where sums exceed statutory limit.
|
30 May 2002 |
|
|
30 May 2002 |
|
Court ordered security where defendant removed aircraft abroad and faced insolvency, fixing a reasonable quantum and reserving variation.
Civil procedure — Security under Order XXXVI r.6 CPC — Removal of assets from jurisdiction; intention to obstruct enforcement; judicial discretion in awarding and quantifying security; interlocutory limitation on merits inquiry.
|
28 May 2002 |
|
Convictions quashed where visual identification and retracted confessions lacked corroboration and voluntariness proof.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification evidence – inherently weak and requires corroboration (Waziri Amani v R) – Retracted confessions – inadmissible unless voluntariness proved by trial within a trial – Convictions unsafe and quashed.
|
27 May 2002 |
|
The appellant’s theft conviction based on suspicion and inadequate evidence was quashed and he was discharged.
Criminal law – Theft – Circumstantial and suspicion-based evidence – Conviction unsafe where proof beyond reasonable doubt absent; absence of formal handover of duties and multiple persons accessing premises undermines prosecution case – Prosecutor’s non-support of conviction on appeal – Quash and discharge.
|
27 May 2002 |
|
Convictions for obtaining money by false pretence quashed where evidence was unreliable and essential elements unproven.
Criminal law – Obtaining money by false pretence – Elements of offence – Proof of false representation and intent to defraud – Evidence and credibility of witnesses – Liability absent proof of conspiracy.
|
27 May 2002 |
|
Appellants' convictions for obtaining by false pretence were found unsound where false pretence, intent and conspiracy were not proved.
Criminal law – Obtaining by false pretences (s.302 Penal Code) – elements: false representation and intent to defraud – proof required. Evidence – Credibility of witnesses – appellate re‑evaluation where contradictions and fabrication apparent. Criminal liability – conspiracy/common purpose required to ascribe liability for acts of third party.
|
27 May 2002 |
|
Administrator removed for mismanagement and hostility; letters surrendered, matrimonial home restored, Administrator General to be invited to assume administration.
Probate — Removal of administrator under s.49(2) for mismanagement or hostility — Delivery up of letters under s.51 — Restoration of matrimonial home to widow — Administrator General’s consent required for appointment.
|
22 May 2002 |
|
Conviction quashed where trial judge failed to assess identification reliability and adequately evaluate defence evidence.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — duty of trial court to assess reliability of visual identification given adverse conditions; misidentification risk — evaluation of defence/alibi — benefit of doubt — conviction unsafe.
|
22 May 2002 |
|
Applicant’s unexplained 79-day delay defeated enlargement of time to seek a certificate of law for appeal.
Appellate procedure – application for certificate that point of law is involved – time limits under Court of Appeal Rules – exclusion of time to obtain judgment copies – requirement to show good cause for enlargement of time – Abdulilashariff v Kampala General Agency applied.
|
21 May 2002 |
|
The applicant's insurance indemnity claim accrued on the accident date and is time-barred after the six-year limitation period.
Limitation of actions – Law of Limitation Act No.10 of 1971 – accrual of right of action under insurance contract – accrues on date of loss (accident). Section 6(e) – not applicable to contractual indemnity claims arising on occurrence of loss. Estoppel/representation – insurer's silence does not postpone accrual or defeat a valid limitation defence.
|
21 May 2002 |
|
Leave to amend a plaint to substitute the Board of Trustees for a non‑legal entity (Social Security Fund) allowed; amendment permissible under Order VII Rule 11.
Civil procedure – Amendment of plaint – Order VII Rule 11 proviso – Leave to amend where amendment will disclose cause of action – Description v. substitution of parties – Proper party where fund is not a legal person – Board of Trustees to be sued – Joinder of employees and vicarious liability.
|
21 May 2002 |
|
Unexplained repeated non-attendance without medical proof justified ex parte conviction upheld on strong identification and recovery evidence.
Criminal procedure – ex parte proceedings – repeated unexplained absence and requirement to produce evidence to set aside ex parte judgment; Identification evidence – recovery of stolen property and witness identification in daylight; Sentencing – application of Minimum Sentences Act 1972.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
The applicant's failure to give statutory notice of intention to appeal bars the appeal.
Criminal procedure — Appeal — Failure to give notice of intention to appeal under section 361(a) Criminal Procedure Act 1985 — Non-compliance bars the appeal; sentence on guilty plea (Road Traffic Act s.39(2)(5)).
|
20 May 2002 |
|
Night-time torch identification and possession of stolen property sustain convictions; unexcused absence defeats reopening ex parte judgments.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Night-time identification with moonlight and torchlight can be reliable where witnesses knew the accused. Evidence – Cautioned statements and exhibits – Procedural irregularities in admission may be curable if statements have probative value. Criminal procedure – Ex parte judgments – Repeated unexplained absence and failure to produce medical proof disentitle an appellant from reopening ex parte convictions. Property offences – Possession and prompt identification of recently stolen goods can sustain conviction and minimum statutory sentences.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
Whether medical proof and witness testimony suffice to uphold a defilement conviction despite delayed complaint and an alibi.
Criminal law – Defilement – proof beyond reasonable doubt – medical evidence as corroboration of sexual intercourse; delayed complaint and witness credibility; evaluation of alibi evidence.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
Conviction quashed where child-witness formalities, corroboration, identification and s.192 preliminary hearing were not properly addressed.
Criminal law – Evidence Act s.127 (witnesses of tender years) – requirement for voir dire and warning when convicting on uncorroborated child evidence; identification evidence – reliability of identification by poor lighting; Criminal Procedure Act s.192 – requirement of preliminary hearing; procedural irregularities warranting quashal of conviction.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
Appeal against theft convictions raising issues of proof of ownership, reliability of an alleged admission and sufficiency of evidence; judgment text incomplete.
Criminal law – Theft – Proof of ownership/uniqueness of stolen goods – Identification of goods as belonging to an institution. Evidence – Extra‑judicial admissions and their weight as against co‑accused. Criminal procedure – Credibility assessment of witnesses; sufficiency of evidence to convict. Sentencing – Appropriateness of five‑year imprisonment terms.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
Where mass commotion occurred, inadequate identification evidence rendered the appellants' convictions unsafe; appeal allowed.
Criminal law – Visual identification in mass-commotion – Need for clear, specific identification evidence where pitch invasion and general fighting occurred; failure to challenge defensive explanation renders conviction unsafe.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
Injury to a sensitive body part interfering with breastfeeding and sexuality can constitute grievous harm; conviction upheld, sentence reduced.
Criminal law – Grievous harm – Injury to sensitive body part (breast) likely to interfere with breastfeeding and sexual function – Medical evidence supporting conviction – Sentence reduced.
|
20 May 2002 |
|
Conviction based on weak night-time visual identification and ignored alibi was unsafe; appeal allowed, conviction quashed.
Criminal law – Visual identification – reliability of identification made at night in poor light and after delay in naming suspect; Defence of alibi – late disclosure does not relieve court of duty to consider it; Conviction unsafe where identification evidence suspect and alibi ignored.
|
17 May 2002 |
|
Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action against the fourth defendant named as surety.
Commercial law – pleadings – cause of action; preliminary objection to name of defendant – court limited to plaint and annexures; deed of suretyship as pleading evidence of liability.
|
16 May 2002 |
|
Conviction for grievous harm upheld on reliable identification and corroborating medical evidence; alibi without notice failed.
Criminal law – occasioning grievous harm – identification evidence – reliability of complainant’s identification of neighbour – medical evidence (PF3) corroboration – alibi defence without prior notice held insufficient.
|
15 May 2002 |
|
Failure to serve notice and Registrar’s letter rendered the appeal incompetent and it was struck out with costs.
Civil procedure — Appeal — Mandatory service of notice of appeal (rule 77(1)) — Service of letter requesting High Court proceedings — Time computation and exception under rule 83(1) — Failure to comply renders appeal incompetent — Raising non‑service objection at hearing permissible.
|
15 May 2002 |
|
Appellate court upheld acquittal for malicious damage due to insufficiency of evidence.
Criminal law – Malicious damage to property (s.326(1) Penal Code) – Sufficiency of evidence – Acquittal upheld where prosecution failed to adduce evidence to support conviction; appellate court declines to disturb findings of lower courts.
|
14 May 2002 |
|
Whether a divorced couple’s later association was a valid remarriage and whether the respondent deserved a share of subsequently acquired assets.
Family law – remarriage after divorce – Law of Marriage Act 1971 does not bar subsequent marriages; formal statutory requirements must be proved for validity. Family/property – division of assets – claims in respect of assets acquired after an earlier divorce (or substantially improved thereafter) may be valid. Evidence – adequacy of proof of marriage formalities and of party’s contribution to property acquisition or improvement.
|
14 May 2002 |
|
Appeals dismissed where accused caught selling recently stolen pharmacy medicines and offered no explanation for possession.
Criminal law – Robbery – Possession of recently stolen property as evidence linking accused to theft; identification evidence; circumstantial proof can sustain conviction where accused cannot explain possession; upholding trial court's evaluation of evidence.
|
10 May 2002 |
|
A Ward Tribunal criminal case is not res judicata in civil land claims; a late appeal to the District Court is a nullity.
Land law – allocation by village council – allocation by statutory village authority extinguishes prior interests. Res judicata – requirement that prior proceeding be civil for res judicata to apply; Ward Tribunal criminal proceedings do not bar subsequent civil claims. Civil procedure – limitation – appeals from Primary Court to District Court must be lodged within 30 days under s.20(2) Magistrates Courts Act 1984; late appeal is a nullity.
|
9 May 2002 |
|
Res judicata inapplicable to prior criminal trespass; time‑barred appeal rendered District Court decision null; appeal allowed.
Civil procedure – res judicata – prior criminal proceeding cannot operate as res judicata in subsequent civil dispute between same parties. Appeals – time limits – section 20(2) Magistrates Courts Act 1984 – appeal from Primary Court to District Court must be lodged within thirty days; late appeal is a nullity and cannot found a further appeal. Land – village council allocation – allocation by statutory village organ extinguishes prior informal or temporary occupation rights.
|
9 May 2002 |
|
The Sexual Offences Act covers animals and credible eyewitness proof of penetration suffices to convict for bestiality.
Sexual Offences Act – interpretation – whether applies to animals (bestiality) – statutory replacement of s.154 expands scope to animals. Evidence – sufficiency – eyewitness testimony of penetration can support conviction without expert medical/veterinary evidence. Proof required – penetration alone suffices; emission not necessary to establish the offence. Sentence – statutory minimums under Sexual Offences Special Provisions Act (minimum 30 years for the offence).
|
8 May 2002 |
|
An application labelled a review was actually an appeal; lacking review grounds, the application was dismissed.
Civil procedure – Review under Section 78 and Order XLII – grounds: new evidence, mistake apparent on face of record, other sufficient reason. Distinction between review and appeal – mislabeled memorandum of review actually constituting an appeal. Limitation law – dispute whether cause of action is ownership/encroachment (longer limitation) or tortious trespass (shorter limitation) – factual/legal characterisation not reviewable as mistake apparent on record.
|
8 May 2002 |
|
Application for review dismissed for failure to show new evidence or apparent error; memorandum amounted to an impermissible appeal.
Review procedure — Order XLII/Rule 1 and principles — grounds for review: discovery of new evidence or apparent error on the face of record; Limitation of actions — characterization of claim (tort vs. land ownership) and applicability of Limitation Act; Procedural law — review cannot be used to reargue/appeal the court's own decision.
|
8 May 2002 |
|
Applicant's review dismissed: memorandum treated as an appeal and review grounds not established.
Limitation of actions; review vs appeal; requirements for review (new evidence or apparent error on face of record); characterization of cause of action (land ownership v tort); Limitation Act applicability.
|
8 May 2002 |
|
|
8 May 2002 |
|
|
8 May 2002 |
|
A mislabeled appeal cannot be treated as a review; no review where no new evidence or apparent error.
Civil procedure – Review under Section 78 and Order XLII – review limited to new evidence, mistake apparent on face of record, or sufficient reason; mislabeled appeals are not maintainable as reviews; limitation law – distinction between tort (trespass) and land ownership/encroachment claims relevant to limitation periods.
|
8 May 2002 |
|
Appellate court may, under revisional powers, convert acquittal to conviction where recent possession proves theft.
Criminal law – Revisional jurisdiction (s.37(1) Criminal Procedure Code) – Power to convert acquittal to conviction in interest of justice; Criminal law – Theft – doctrine of recent possession; Stock Theft Ordinance/ Penal Code – possession of stolen stock as evidence of guilt.
|
8 May 2002 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where Bankruptcy Ordinance adequately governed intervener rights and no important legal issue arose.
Bankruptcy Ordinance – intervener (third-party) challenges to bankruptcy orders – rights of third parties under the Ordinance – intervener proceedings not governed by Civil Procedure Code – leave to appeal refused for lack of important point of law.
|
7 May 2002 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where intervener’s challenge to bankruptcy order raised no important point of law.
Bankruptcy law – Intervener proceedings – Rights of third parties aggrieved by bankruptcy orders – Whether intervener proceedings are governed by the Bankruptcy Ordinance or the Civil Procedure Code – Leave to appeal to Court of Appeal where no important point of law arises.
|
7 May 2002 |
|
|
7 May 2002 |
|
|
7 May 2002 |
|
Court confirmed the applicant's amendment of its memorandum to undertake commercial banking and custodial services.
Companies law – alteration of memorandum of association; confirmation under s.7(1)(d) & s.7(2) Companies Ordinance; compatibility with Banking and Financial Institutions Act; Registrar of Companies’ non-objection; commercial banking and custodial powers.
|
6 May 2002 |
|
Applicant's unexplained five-year delay in seeking leave for prerogative relief warranted dismissal of extension application.
Civil procedure – Extension of time – Application for leave to apply for prerogative orders (certiorari, mandamus, declaration) – Requirement to show sufficient cause for delay – negotiations or liaison with respondent insufficient without explanation for each period of delay.
|
6 May 2002 |
|
Appeal upholds convictions of three appellants (including neglect by night watchman); third appellant acquitted for lack of evidence.
Criminal law – breaking and stealing (ss 396(1), 265 Penal Code) – neglect to prevent offence (s 383) – recent possession doctrine – competency/compellability of witness (Law of Evidence s 127) – court’s power to detain refractory witness (Criminal Procedure s 199(1)(b)).
|
6 May 2002 |
|
Application for extension of time dismissed; applicant failed to show cause and matter was time-barred under the Tanzania Harbours Authority Act.
Extension of time — applicant must show sufficient cause and specify ‘‘supervening events’’ causing delay; statutory limitation — matter time-barred under s.66(1) and s.67(a),(b) Tanzania Harbours Authority Act (UI of 1977).
|
3 May 2002 |
|
Absence of violence or threat defeats robbery charge; seizure to satisfy debt may be civil, not criminal.
Criminal law — Robbery — Essential ingredients: theft plus actual violence or threat — No evidence of violence defeats robbery charge; debtor-creditor seizure may not constitute theft — Civil remedy for excess value over legitimate claim.
|
3 May 2002 |
|
Proceedings in an administration cause conducted by a magistrate without jurisdiction are a nullity; merits need not be considered.
Civil procedure – Jurisdiction – Proceedings conducted by a magistrate lacking requisite jurisdiction are null and void. Magistrates’ Court – Constitution and jurisdiction – Magistrates’ Court Act provisions on proper constitution of court. Administration/Probate – Proceedings in probate/administration cause invalid where presiding officer lacked jurisdiction.
|
2 May 2002 |
|
Proceedings before a magistrate lacking statutory jurisdiction are null and must be reheard by a competent magistrate.
Magistrates' Courts – Constitution of court – section 6(1)(c) Magistrates' Courts Act – jurisdictional competence of presiding magistrate – proceedings by a magistrate lacking statutory jurisdiction are nullities – probate and administration proceedings.
|
2 May 2002 |