|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| November 2009 |
|
|
|
24 November 2009 |
|
Applicant failed to prove court-clerk misinformation; dismissal for non-appearance was not set aside.
Civil procedure – setting aside dismissal for non-appearance; requirement to show good and sufficient reason; need for evidentiary support for allegations of misinformation by court staff; promptness alone insufficient.
|
20 November 2009 |
|
Respondent’s land recovery claim barred by limitation due to continuous occupation and prescription.
Land law – limitation/prescription – suit to recover land must be instituted within 12 years; continuous occupation and inheritance can bar a later recovery claim; appellate review – failure to consider limitation is an error of law.
|
20 November 2009 |
|
Procedural failure to take a lawful plea and an unlawful 100‑year sentence led the High Court to quash conviction and order potential retrial.
* Criminal procedure – Plea-taking – Charge must be read and explained and plea recorded (s.228 Criminal Procedure Act). * Preliminary hearing – Accelerated trial rules (s.192 and GN 192/88) – admitted facts and exhibits must be recorded and identified. * Conviction based on irregular plea – nullifies proceedings. * Sentencing – Magistrate exceeded statutory limit; 100 years unlawful where statutory sentence is 30 years (s.158(1) Penal Code). * Revisional jurisdiction – High Court may quash conviction and order retrial (s.373 Criminal Procedure Act).
|
20 November 2009 |
|
Application for leave to appeal out of time dismissed for lack of proper verification, supporting documents and prosecution.
* Civil procedure – application for leave to appeal out of time – requirements for affidavit verification and showing sufficient cause for delay – necessity of attaching notice of intention to appeal and intended memorandum of appeal. * Non‑attendance and failure to prosecute application – ground for dismissal. * Compliance with Order VI Rule 15(1) & (2) CPC (CAP 33 R.E. 2002).
|
19 November 2009 |
|
Leave to appeal refused because an extension application citing non-existent law left the court improperly moved.
Civil procedure — competence of application — wrong or obsolete citation of statutory provisions — effect on whether court is properly moved; extension of time — requirement of a competent application for filing submissions out of time; leave to appeal — necessity of an arguable point of law before Court of Appeal; retrospective extension — cannot be granted where no valid application exists.
|
16 November 2009 |
|
Leave to appeal refused where extension application was incompetent due to wrong statutory citation, dismissing appeal for want of prosecution.
Civil procedure – extension of time – competence of application – wrong or non-existent citation of statutory provisions renders application incompetent; court must be properly moved – consequence: no jurisdiction to extend time or consider merits; leave to appeal refused where no point of law arises.
|
16 November 2009 |
|
High Court lacked pecuniary jurisdiction over a TShs.200,000/- claim; plaint struck out with costs.
* Commercial/Procedural law – Pecuniary jurisdiction – Substantive claim (not general damages) determines jurisdiction of the court.
* Civil Procedure – Order VII Rule 11 – Rejection of plaint vs striking out where court lacks jurisdiction.
* Forum – Commercial claims within lower monetary thresholds belong in resident magistrate or district courts.
* Costs – plaint struck out for want of jurisdiction; costs awarded to defendant.
|
13 November 2009 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause for delay; extension of time to object to taxation and execution decision refused.
Advocates’ taxation — extension of time — requirement to show sufficient cause for delay; proof of representation by instructions and communications; alleged conflict of interest not proved; Taxing Master’s discretion to award execution interest and additional costs; ex-parte proceedings and substituted service.
|
13 November 2009 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause for extension to challenge taxed costs; valid representation and no proven conflict of interest.
Advocates' costs — taxation — extension of time under Limitation Act — sufficient cause required; Legal representation — authority and communication evidenced by handwritten instructions; Conflict of interest — subsequent separate retainer does not establish concurrent conflict; Advocate-client confidentiality — disclosure permissible to rebut allegations of unauthorised representation; Taxing Master — discretion to award interest and additional execution costs.
|
13 November 2009 |
|
A registered Tanzanian trade mark owner is entitled to injunction against respondent's importation or sale of identical marks in Tanzania.
Trade mark law — validity and effect of local registration; territoriality of trade mark rights; proof of foreign registration; evidentiary burden for prior use and agency; injunctive relief versus monetary remedies.
|
13 November 2009 |
|
|
13 November 2009 |
|
Conviction quashed where no lawful order was shown to have been directed to the appellant and land ownership remained a civil dispute.
Criminal law – Disobedience of lawful order (s.124 Penal Code): must prove a lawful order and service to the accused; witness in civil proceedings not automatically liable for orders between litigants – land ownership disputes belong to civil jurisdiction; criminal court not proper forum to determine unresolved title/boundary disputes.
|
12 November 2009 |
|
Conviction under s.124 invalid where no lawful order was shown to be directed at the accused; land disputes require civil suit.
Criminal law – Disobedience of lawful order (s.124 Penal Code) – requirement of a lawful order directed to accused – absence of order produced at trial – witnesses in civil proceedings not bound by orders between parties – criminal courts not proper forum for unresolved land ownership or boundary disputes.
|
12 November 2009 |
|
|
12 November 2009 |
|
Leave granted to file appeal papers out of time where prison authorities' failure to transmit documents constituted sufficient cause.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to file notice and petition of appeal under section 361(1) & (2) – delay attributed to prison authorities' failure to transmit documents – respondent's concession – good and sufficient cause established.
|
11 November 2009 |
|
Conviction for possession of forged notes unsustainable where prosecution fails to prove accused knew notes were counterfeit.
Criminal law – Possession of forged bank notes – Requirement that prosecution prove accused knew notes were counterfeit; Section 348 Penal Code – Evidential onus on accused to show lawful authority or excuse only after prosecution proves knowledge; Benefit of doubt and safety of conviction.
|
7 November 2009 |
|
Conviction upheld on recent possession evidence; consecutive sentences set aside and substituted with concurrent seven-year term.
* Criminal law – Housebreaking and theft – recent possession doctrine – unexplained possession of stolen goods shortly after theft is presumptive evidence supporting conviction.* Criminal procedure – sentencing – counts arising from same transaction – sentences ordinarily run concurrently unless aggravating reasons justify consecutive terms.
|
6 November 2009 |
|
Recent unexplained possession warranted conviction; consecutive sentences for same-transaction offences were set aside for concurrent terms.
Criminal law – recent possession doctrine – unexplained possession of stolen goods shortly after theft as presumptive evidence; Conviction on housebreaking and stealing supported by identification and evidence of sale; Sentencing – offences arising from same transaction ordinarily attract concurrent sentences unless aggravating reasons exist; Trial court must state reasons for consecutive sentences and consider mitigation.
|
6 November 2009 |
|
Contractual commission clause barred recovery on debts not actually collected; plaintiff’s other fee claims unproven, suit dismissed with costs.
Contract interpretation — commission-only payment clause; entitlement to commission on uncollected debts; evidential burden to prove commitment and legal-fee payments; necessity of documentary proof (receipts, bills).
|
6 November 2009 |
|
Affidavit contained defects; some remediable, but the supporting affidavit was struck out and application dismissed.
Civil procedure – Affidavits: Order XIX r.3 requirements for personal knowledge and verification; jurat formalities under Notaries Public and Commissioners for Oaths Act s.8; distinction between incurable and remediable affidavit defects; remedy by fresh affidavit.
|
4 November 2009 |
|
Affidavit defects: plural jurat and unsupported averments curable by fresh affidavit; defective supporting affidavit struck out.
Civil procedure – affidavits for interlocutory applications (Order XIX r.3) – requirement of personal knowledge; verification and jurat requirements – plural verification and "joint" jurat when single deponent – curability of affidavit defects – disclosure in jurat of place and date; sufficiency of commissioner’s address – discretion to allow fresh affidavit or strike out.
|
4 November 2009 |
|
Conviction quashed where identification, corroboration and evidence of confessions and weapon recovery were unreliable.
Criminal law — identification under adverse conditions; corroboration of single-witness testimony; admissibility and reliability of statements obtained after sungusungu violence; appellate re-evaluation of credibility where trial findings are undermined by contradictions; failure to establish recovery and chain of custody of alleged weapon.
|
4 November 2009 |
|
|
3 November 2009 |
|
Court granted temporary injunction preserving licence approval status quo over disputed spectrum pending suit.
Temporary injunctions — interlocutory relief — tests: prima facie/serious question, irreparable injury, balance of convenience — preservation of status quo (approval letter dated 24 April 2007) — administrative discretion in spectrum allocation must be exercised judiciously — evidential burden in interlocutory applications.
|
3 November 2009 |
|
|
3 November 2009 |
|
Commercial Division has jurisdiction over company governance disputes despite absent valuation; preliminary objections dismissed with costs.
• Commercial jurisdiction – High Court (Commercial Division) – Whether omission of monetary valuation in plaint ousts jurisdiction – Order VII r.1(i) CPC and Commercial Court Rules.
• Company law – governance disputes – misappropriation of company property (title deed, common seal) – cause of action under Companies Act.
• Civil procedure – preliminary objections – abuse of process; frivolous, vexatious or scandalous pleadings; consolidation of causes of action.
|
2 November 2009 |
| October 2009 |
|
|
Appeal allowed where district court dismissed appeal as time‑barred without affording appellant opportunity to be heard.
Limitation of actions – suo motu raising of limitation by appellate court – natural justice – right to be heard before dismissing appeal as time‑barred – section 19(2) Law of Limitation Act (exclusion of time for obtaining proceedings) – order for de novo hearing.
|
30 October 2009 |
|
Second appeal dismissed: no point of law raised and civil award for damaged trees upheld.
Civil procedure – second appeal – limited to points of law; Criminal and civil remedies – effect of unappealed criminal conviction on subsequent civil claims for damages; Evidence – evaluation of proof of malicious damage to property (trees) and entitlement to compensation.
|
30 October 2009 |
|
Applicant’s failure to appeal criminal conviction precludes later challenge; civil courts may award compensation for property damage.
Civil procedure – second appeal restricted to points of law; Failure to appeal criminal conviction precludes later complaint; Civil remedy for property damage distinct from criminal proceedings; Evaluation of evidence on balance of probabilities to award compensation for trees cut.
|
30 October 2009 |
|
Night-time visual identification found unreliable, convictions quashed and sentences set aside.
* Criminal law – visual identification – night-time identification – Amani Waziri caution: visual ID is weak and must be watertight; * Criminal procedure – caution statements – late objections treated as afterthoughts where no contemporaneous objection in record; * Criminal procedure – prosecution’s discretion in calling witnesses listed at preliminary hearing; * Appeal – convictions quashed where identification unsafe and prosecution case unreliable.
|
30 October 2009 |
|
Plaintiff holds title and buildings; rectification was not shown fraudulent; defendant’s ownership and damages claims dismissed.
Land law – title dispute – certificate No.15391 – rectification/registration error versus fraud – GN 169/1969 (BAKWATA vesting order) – fixtures: buildings as part of land – failure to prove damages or entitlement to income – counterclaim dismissed.
|
30 October 2009 |
|
A fresh land claim was properly dismissed as res judicata because the same issue had been finally decided by a competent court.
* Civil procedure — Res judicata — Application of section 9 Civil Procedure Code — same parties, same title, same substantial issue, final decision by competent court.
* Land law — Ownership and vacant possession — cannot relitigate identical land dispute after final judgment.
* Jurisdiction — Alleged lack of jurisdiction in earlier proceedings does not permit fresh suit where judgment remains unannulled; proper remedy is appeal/revision.
|
30 October 2009 |
|
Applicant’s failure to file court-ordered submissions amounted to abandonment; leave to appeal dismissed with costs.
• Civil procedure – Chambers summons for leave to appeal – Application under Land Disputes Courts Act, Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Court of Appeal Rules.
• Civil procedure – Notice of Appeal – timeliness and alleged registrar delay; withdrawal of notice.
• Civil procedure – Failure to comply with court-ordered timetable for written submissions – deemed abandonment of arguments and ground for dismissal with costs.
• Practice – Court may dismiss applications where parties fail to prosecute or comply with directions (citing Maria Rutarabamu v National Housing Corporation).
|
27 October 2009 |
|
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs due to parties’ failure to file agreed written submissions (abandonment).
Land law — leave to appeal — procedural non‑compliance — failure to file agreed written submissions — abandonment — dismissal with costs; application under s.47(1)&(3) Land Disputes Courts Act, s.5(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act and Rule 43(a) Court of Appeal Rules.
|
27 October 2009 |
|
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution; both parties ordered to bear their own costs due to mutual non-attendance.
* Civil procedure – dismissal for want of prosecution – effect of persistent non-appearance by appellant; * Civil procedure – costs – discretion to award costs where both parties have failed to attend; * Advocacy – withdrawal of counsel and its effect on prosecution of appeal.
|
27 October 2009 |
|
Trial judge's biased summing up, factual errors and failure to address defence rendered conviction unsafe; retrial ordered.
Criminal law – murder – sufficiency of circumstantial evidence; trial procedure – summing up to assessors – duty to direct on both prosecution and defence evidence; material misstatements of fact and improper comments by judge – prejudice to assessors’ opinions; requirement under s.312(1) CPA for reasoned judgment; invocation of revisional jurisdiction and order for retrial.
|
26 October 2009 |
|
Conviction for solicitation and incitement upheld; sentence and compensation remitted for statutory confirmation and jurisdictional review.
* Criminal law – Solicitation and incitement (s.390 Penal Code) – evidentiary sufficiency and credibility of principal witness. * Defence of claim of right – inapplicable where accused charged with solicitation/incitement rather than theft. * Criminal procedure – requirement for District Court confirmation of Primary Court sentences (Magistrates' Courts Act, Third Schedule Part II Rule 7(1)(a)). * Civil relief by criminal court – limits of Primary Court jurisdiction to order compensation (Third Schedule Rule 5(1)(b)) – remittal for lawful determination.
|
26 October 2009 |
|
|
26 October 2009 |
|
Admissions in the respondent’s defence and unchallenged ex parte evidence entitled the appellant to return of property, refund and damages.
Civil procedure – ex parte hearing – admissions in written statement of defence – evidential value; Partnership law – oral partnership agreement – recovery of contributions and personal property; Evidence – unpleaded claims and requirement of documentary proof for division of profits.
|
23 October 2009 |
|
|
23 October 2009 |
|
Court dismissed preliminary objections, holding the plaint disclosed a cause of action and defects were curable by amendment.
* Civil procedure – preliminary objections – mode of raising objections – whether separate notices are permissible.* Pleadings – cause of action – sufficiency of plaint to disclose contractual claim and assignment.* Service and time limits – computation of time where summons served via an affiliated entity and court-granted filing dates.* Pleadings – signature and verification requirements (Order VI Rule 14) – irregularities curable by amendment.* Res judicata and non-joinder – adjudication between different parties does not automatically bar fresh proceedings against assignee.
|
23 October 2009 |
|
|
23 October 2009 |
|
|
23 October 2009 |
|
|
23 October 2009 |
|
Taxing officer erred in allowing respondent’s bill where trial court did not award respondent costs.
Civil procedure – costs and taxation – interpretation of trial court’s costs order – taxing officer’s jurisdiction to tax bill only where party was awarded costs by court; appellate interference with taxing officer’s decision only for wrong principle or misconception.
|
23 October 2009 |
|
Taxing officer wrongly allowed costs to a party who was not awarded them; assessment set aside, each party bears own costs.
Taxation of costs – assessment by taxing officer – court will only interfere where wrong principle or misconception applied – taxing officer must verify that costs were awarded by the court – interpretation of brief costs orders – costs follow the event unless expressly directed otherwise.
|
23 October 2009 |
|
Reporting suspected crime to police is qualifiedly privileged; applicant must prove malice to succeed in defamation.
Defamation — Reporting to police — Qualified privilege — Necessity of proving actual malice for liability — Dismissal of criminal proceedings does not alone prove malice.
|
23 October 2009 |
|
|
22 October 2009 |
|
A plaintiff cannot sue a disclosed principal's local agent for contractual breaches or evade an exclusive UK jurisdiction clause.
Agency law – disclosed principal – agent not liable for principal’s contractual breaches absent express agreement; Cause of action – plaint must disclose right to sue on its face; Jurisdiction – exclusive jurisdiction clause (bill of lading) vests jurisdiction in foreign courts and bars local suit; Shipping Agency Act – describes agent’s role but does not impose liability for principal’s omissions; Procedure – amendment under Order VII r.1(a) ineffective where court lacks jurisdiction.
|
22 October 2009 |