|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| October 2013 |
|
|
Court dismissed land appeal after finding the appellant lacked locus standi and originating proceedings were void.
Land law – locus standi – capacity to sue – plaintiff must prove title or authority (e.g., ownership, administration of estate, family representative). Civil procedure – nullity – proceedings are void ab initio where claimant lacks locus standi; subsequent appeals founded on void proceedings fall. Evidence – conflict of witness accounts undermining proof of ownership.
|
31 October 2013 |
|
Court allowed applicant's departure from scheduling order and held an oral application acceptable under Order VIII A r.4, dismissing respondent's objection with costs.
Civil procedure — Order VIII A r.4 — Scheduling/rescheduling orders — Departure or amendment allowed only in the interests of justice — Mode of application not prescribed; oral application acceptable — Costs ordinarily borne by party benefiting from departure.
|
31 October 2013 |
|
Negligent miscalculation of the limitation period does not constitute good cause for extending time to seek revision.
Labour procedure – extension of time to apply for revision – applicant’s counsel’s inadvertent miscalculation and negligence do not constitute good cause – strict application of limitation rules – substantial delay despite prior 14‑day extension – application dismissed.
|
30 October 2013 |
|
Applicant failed to prove underpayment, breach or discriminatory treatment; CMA decision confirmed and revision dismissed.
Labour law – burden of proof in employment disputes (other than unfair termination) lies with complainant; discrimination – prima facie case required under ELRA and ILO Convention No.111 before burden shifts; not all unfair differentiation amounts to prohibited discrimination; requirement to produce contracts, specified sums and comparative data to substantiate underpayment/promotional claims.
|
30 October 2013 |
|
Ex parte judgment set aside for lack of service and breach of right to be heard; labour dispute referred to CMA.
Natural justice – right to be heard; service of summons/notice of hearing – proof required; ex parte judgments vitiated by lack of service; Pleadings – limits on reliefs not specifically pleaded but possible under "any other relief" if founded on pleadings and evidence; Subsistence allowance requires legal liability to repatriate proved; Jurisdiction – labour disputes to be determined by CMA after ELRA transitional period expired (28 May 2013).
|
30 October 2013 |
|
Ex parte judgment set aside for lack of service; unpleaded subsistence award unjustified and dispute referred to the CMA.
Ex parte proceedings – service of summons – right to be heard and natural justice; Reliefs not pleaded – limits of "any other relief" and requirement of pleadings and proof; Labour jurisdiction – transitional provisions of Employment and Labour Relations Act and referral to Commission for Mediation and Arbitration.
|
30 October 2013 |
|
An arbitration clause requires disputes on termination and payment to be referred to arbitration; court stayed the suit.
Arbitration clause – scope and enforcement – disputes over contractual termination and non-payment fall within arbitration clause; stay of court proceedings under s.6 Arbitration Act enforced; parties’ readiness to arbitrate relevant.
|
29 October 2013 |
|
Primary courts may hear cattle trespass under customary law; omission to apply such law or consult assessors nullifies judgment.
Jurisdiction – Primary Courts – Civil proceedings – Cattle trespass – Whether trespass can be governed by customary law and thus be within primary court jurisdiction. Application of law – Requirement to apply customary law prevailing in local jurisdiction under section 11(3) Judicature and Application of Laws Act. Procedure – Primary Courts (Judgment of Court) Rules – Duty to consult assessors and requirement of assessors' signatures on judgment. Relief – Quashing of Primary Court judgment for failure to state law applied and failure to consult assessors; remittal to Primary Court before different magistrate and assessors.
|
28 October 2013 |
|
Appeal allowed: conviction quashed because prosecution failed to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt with non‑watertight evidence.
Criminal law – Theft – Evidence; Requirement that guilt be proved beyond reasonable doubt; Circumstantial and single-witness evidence must be watertight and lead irresistibly to guilt; Appellate review in second appeal where lower courts' findings are unsafe.
|
28 October 2013 |
|
Employer failed to prove guilty possession of condemned meat; absence of key witnesses justified dismissal of revision.
Labour law – unfair termination – employer's burden to prove misconduct; failure to call key witnesses undermines proof of guilty possession. Evidence – absentee witnesses (veterinary doctor, person found with goods) – impact on credibility and sufficiency of proof. Civil procedure – review of arbitral award – courts will not disturb CMA findings where material evidential gaps remain with employer bearing the onus.
|
28 October 2013 |
|
Failure to state the claim’s pecuniary value is a mandatory defect that renders a plaint fatally defective and liable to be struck out.
Commercial procedure – Order VII Rule 1(i) CPC – Mandatory requirement to state value of subject matter – Pecuniary jurisdiction and court fees – Failure to state value fatal; plaint struck out – Amendment and topping up fees not proper remedy in preliminary objection context.
|
25 October 2013 |
|
Omission to state the claim’s value is a fatal defect; plaint struck out for violating Order VII Rule 1(i).
Civil Procedure — Order VII Rule 1(i) C.P.C. — mandatory requirement to state value of subject matter for jurisdiction and court fees — failure fatal; amendment under Commercial Division Rules; striking out plaint; underassessment of court fees administrative.
|
25 October 2013 |
|
Application for interim injunction struck out for relying on inapplicable statutory provisions despite court's residual power to grant relief.
Civil procedure – interlocutory relief – wrong or incomplete citation of statutory provision; applicability of Order XXXVII Rule 1 to post-execution injunctions; scope of sections 68(c) and 95 (Civil Procedure Code); High Court’s power under s.2(2) Judicature Act to grant interim injunctions where Code is silent.
|
25 October 2013 |
|
Failure by the plaintiff to state the claim's value is fatal; plaint struck out for non‑compliance with Order VII Rule 1(i).
Civil Procedure — Order VII Rule 1(i) CPC — Mandatory requirement to state value of subject matter in plaint — Purpose: jurisdiction and court fees — Failure fatal — Remedy: striking out — Amendment and topping up fees not permitted to cure mandatory omission.
|
25 October 2013 |
|
Failure to state claim value in plaint is mandatory defect that attracts striking out and costs.
Civil Procedure – Order VII r.1(i) – mandatory requirement to state value of subject‑matter in plaint – necessity for determining pecuniary jurisdiction and court fees; omission fatal and plaint struck out; amendment not available once plaint defective in this mandatory particular.
|
25 October 2013 |
|
Agent-custodian can sue warehousekeepers for non-delivery; shrinkage allowed at 1%, defendants liable for remaining shortage with interest and costs.
• Contract and bailment – warehouse storage of agricultural produce – liability for non-delivery under storage contracts and effect of warehouse receipts and release warrants. • Agency – locus to sue: agent/custodian may sue on behalf of primary cooperative societies despite absence of written agency agreement. • Evidence – role of admissions, warehouse receipts and purchaser's release warrants in proving non-delivery. • Shrinkage – allowable percentage and allocation of loss between warehousekeepers and owners. • Remedies – quantification of defective delivery, interest, nominal general damages and costs.
|
25 October 2013 |
|
Second appeal dismissed—concurrent findings that respondent owned the matrimonial house upheld; valuation to occur at execution.
Matrimonial property division; second appeal—deference to concurrent findings of fact; ownership and contribution to matrimonial house; valuation at execution; no interference absent misdirection or illegality.
|
24 October 2013 |
|
The Defendant cannot be sued outside of contractual matters as per Tanzanian law.
Administrative law – Executive agency capability – TANROADS legal status – Suitability of suing an agency only in contract.
|
24 October 2013 |
|
High Court struck application out: no contract, applicant lacked locus standi, procurement disputes governed by Public Procurement Act.
Public Procurement Act – jurisdiction of statutory procurement dispute mechanisms vs High Court original jurisdiction; Locus standi – entitlement of non-bidder to challenge procurement process; Contract formation – demand note as offer and applicant's response as counter-offer (no acceptance); Interim injunctions in procurement disputes and against local authorities.
|
24 October 2013 |
|
Conviction for stealing by agent quashed for failure to prove essential elements and inadequately reasoned trial judgment.
Criminal law – stealing by agent – proof of actus reus and mens rea; Criminal procedure – judgment requirements under s.312(1) – points for determination and objective evaluation; Evidentiary weight of complainant's post-event payments and lack of verification.
|
23 October 2013 |
|
Court upheld conviction for grievous harm, finding the applicant properly identified by witnesses despite night-time attack.
Criminal law – grievous harm – visual identification at night – requirements from Waziri Amani and Yassin Maulid Kipanta – prior acquaintance and lighting conditions; witness credibility; clerical/topographical errors not fatal to conviction.
|
23 October 2013 |
|
Defendants failed to prove loan discharge or non-existence; leave to defend denied and summary judgment for the bank granted.
Civil procedure – Summary judgment (Order 35 CPC) – Mortgage Finance Act s.25(b) amendment – leave to appear and defend requires proof that loan (or part) was discharged or never taken – vague denials insufficient – "without prejudice" correspondence inadmissible to prove agreed terms.
|
23 October 2013 |
|
Applicants failed to show loan discharge or non-existence; leave denied and summary judgment entered for the respondent.
Civil procedure – Order 35 summary proceedings – leave to defend; amended test under Mortgage Finance (Special Provisions) Act No.17 of 2008 requiring proof of loan discharge or non-existence. Evidence – "without prejudice" correspondence ordinarily inadmissible absent agreement; such letters disregarded in summary proceedings. Affidavit evidence – vague or general assertions insufficient to raise triable issue; court’s role limited to determining existence of bona fide defence.
|
23 October 2013 |
|
Supplier entitled to unpaid fuel price; invoices and regulated pump prices determine price; special damages unproven.
Sale of goods – price determination under Sale of Goods Act s.10 – pump/invoice prices as course of dealing; admissibility and weight of invoices, delivery cards and cheque deposit slip; uncertainty of price not fatal where regulated prices apply; adverse inference where party fails to call material witness; special damages require strict proof.
|
22 October 2013 |
|
An equivocal guilty plea, not shown to be unequivocal, justifies quashing conviction and sentence.
Criminal law – Plea of guilty – Equivocal plea – Court must ensure accused understands charge and has no defence before conviction – Failure to explain ingredients and to secure unequivocal plea entitles accused to quash of conviction and sentence.
|
21 October 2013 |
|
Court rejected the applicant's excuse for delay but granted a one-week extension to clarify ambiguities in the mediated award.
Labour law – extension of time to apply for revision of CMA mediated award – requirement to show good cause for delay; Mediated award ambiguity – inconsistent number of beneficiaries and unspecified monetary amount; Execution of decree – may proceed but can be stayed if decree amount deposited and revision application filed on time.
|
21 October 2013 |
|
Unsatisfactory night-time identification evidence and contradictions led to quashing of conviction and immediate release.
Criminal law – identification evidence at night – requirement to state source, intensity and proximity of light; contradictions in prosecution testimony; tracing footprints and post-arrest recovery as corroboration; failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
|
18 October 2013 |
|
Conviction quashed where trial evidence showed rape but charge was incest, identification was unsafe and defence (alibi) was not considered.
Criminal law – Charge consistency – Evidence of rape while charged with incest is a fatal defect; proper charging required. Identification – Night-time identification by voice and uncertain lighting is unsafe; risk of mistaken identity. Criminal procedure – Trial court must specify statutory subsections invoked (s.127 TEA) and must objectively evaluate defence case (alibi) in its judgment. Retrial – Disallowed where it would risk injustice by permitting prosecution to cure a defective case.
|
17 October 2013 |
|
Flawed identification, omitted eyewitness and search contradictions made the prosecution case unsafe; conviction quashed.
Criminal law — Identification of stolen property — Specific marks and clear descriptions required to establish ownership of common items. Criminal procedure — Identification parades and procedures — Suspect should not be introduced to complainant while in custody. Evidence — Failure to call material eyewitness — Court may draw adverse inference under Hemedi Saidi principle. Evidence — Contradictions in search and seizure and chain of custody diminish credibility of prosecution case. Criminal procedure — Duty to consider defendant’s alibi; ignoring it may vitiate the conviction.
|
17 October 2013 |
|
Arbitral award quashed because a central jurisdictional objection was not referred to court, denying parties a fair hearing.
Arbitration — jurisdiction of arbitrator; preliminary jurisdictional objections; case stated referral to High Court; limits of judicial review under Arbitration Act (ss.15,16,18); misconduct/improper procurement; denial of fair hearing (audi alteram partem) as ground to set aside award; remittal versus setting aside.
|
17 October 2013 |
|
Ward Tribunal was improperly constituted and recorded, rendering both ward and appellate tribunal decisions null and quashed.
Land disputes — Ward Tribunal composition — failure to indicate tribunal members — non-compliance with Section 11, Cap. 216 R.E.2002 — unrecorded witness evidence and unconstituted tribunal — proceedings and ensuing appellate decision declared null and quashed.
|
11 October 2013 |
|
Convictions quashed where debt arose from a loan agreement and prosecution failed to prove intention to defraud.
Criminal law – Obtaining money by false pretences – requirement of false representation of existing fact and intent to defraud. Criminal law – Cheating/kite-flying – liability for issuing cheque without funds; necessity of mental element and effect of conditional delivery. Civil v criminal distinction – where indebtedness and loan agreements point to civil remedy rather than criminal fraud. Proof beyond reasonable doubt – burden on prosecution to establish fraudulent intent.
|
11 October 2013 |
|
Convictions for false pretence, cheating and kite-flying quashed where no false representation or criminal intent was proved.
Criminal law – Obtaining money by false pretences – requires false representation of existing fact and intent to defraud. Criminal law – Cheating – requires obtaining by fraudulent trick or device; civil loan default is not cheating. Dishonoured cheques/kite-flying – mens rea essential; conditional cheque and expectation of funds can negate liability. Civil contract dispute distinguished from criminal fraud. Proof beyond reasonable doubt required for criminal convictions.
|
11 October 2013 |
|
Applicant's land claim filed after 13 years was time-barred; lower tribunals' findings upheld and appeal dismissed.
Limitation law – prescription of title to land – uninterrupted occupation for over 12 years bars recovery; Evidence – proof of sale and possession – sale agreement and witness testimony; Appellate review – evaluation of credibility and sufficiency of evidence by lower tribunals; Procedure – ex parte hearing, no costs ordered.
|
11 October 2013 |
|
Failure to cite section 91(1) ELRA renders a revision application incompetent; application struck out with leave to refile.
Labour law — Revision of CMA awards — Must be moved under s.91(1) ELRA — Proper citation of enabling statute is essential — Wrong/non‑citation renders application incompetent — Strike out with leave to refile.
|
11 October 2013 |
|
Illness after the ten-day deadline did not excuse failure to give mandatory notice of intention to appeal, so extension was refused.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to appeal – requirement to give notice of intention to appeal within ten days (s.361(1)(a) Criminal Procedure Act) – request for copy of judgment does not substitute for notice – illness occurring after statutory period cannot excuse failure to give mandatory notice.
|
11 October 2013 |
|
Appellate court set aside excessive maximum sentence for defiling the Quran, stressing mitigating factors and s.35 sentencing options.
Criminal law – Sentencing – Offence under s.125 Penal Code (defilement of holy book) – Application of s.35 (misdemeanour sentencing, option of fine) – Mitigating factors (age, first conviction, provocation) – Whether maximum sentence justified by public order concerns.
|
9 October 2013 |
|
Circumstantial evidence and a dying utterance formed an unbroken chain proving the accused guilty of murder.
Criminal law — Murder — Circumstantial evidence and dying declaration — Corroboration and unbroken chain pointing to accused; witness credibility; malice aforethought established by use of lethal weapon and wounds to vulnerable parts.
|
9 October 2013 |
|
Respondent's land claim was time-barred; appellant had acquired title by adverse possession.
Limitation (Law of Limitation Act, Part I item 22) – 12-year period for land claims; time-bar and prescription. Adverse possession – exclusive, uninterrupted possession for 12 years without fraud establishes title. Evidence and credibility – informal/vague complaints do not interrupt limitation; formal complaint timing is critical. Procedural error – appellate interference justified where lower tribunals omitted to consider a decisive legal issue.
|
8 October 2013 |
|
Alleged illegality does not excuse inordinate delay; applicant failed to justify extension of time to challenge Taxing Master's decision.
Civil procedure – application for extension of time to challenge Taxing Master's decision – requirement to account for delay. Limitation – Section 21 Part III of the Law of Limitation Act applies where no specific period provided. Illegality – allegation of illegality does not automatically excuse inordinate delay. Discretionary relief – extension of time refused where delay unexplained or amounts to negligence.
|
8 October 2013 |
|
Acquittal where sole identifying witness was unreliable, conditions unfavourable and no corroboration of dying declaration.
Criminal law – Identification evidence — visual identification under unfavourable conditions; single-witness caution and need for corroboration; dying declaration and hearsay insufficient without independent corroboration; burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt; acquittal where identification and corroboration deficiencies exist.
|
7 October 2013 |
|
The applicant’s appeal contesting identification, arrest evidence and voluntariness of confessions is dismissed.
Criminal law – Armed robbery – identification of stolen property by recent possession and colour; production of seized item and receipt as cogent proof; Evidence – no minimum number of witnesses; voluntariness of cautioned statements – burden and inquiry; evaluation of circumstantial evidence and 'recent possession' doctrine.
|
7 October 2013 |
|
The applicant's suit was struck out as res judicata because the identical matter was already decided by the Ward Tribunal; appeal, not a fresh suit, was the remedy.
Civil Procedure — Res judicata (s.9 CPC) — Former Ward Tribunal judgment — identical parties, subject matter and issues — fresh suit struck out; appeal is the proper remedy. Procedural objections raised on jurisdiction, advocate's endorsement (Advocates Act) and verification (Order VII rr.15(2),(3)) not determined as res judicata was dispositive.
|
7 October 2013 |
|
|
4 October 2013 |
|
Petitioner, not party to arbitration clause, failed to show misconduct or improper procurement; arbitral award registered and enforced.
Arbitration — arbitration clause interpretation — parties to arbitration agreement; Appointment of arbitrators — compliance with clause requiring three arbitrators; Setting aside award — s.16 Arbitration Act — misconduct or improper procurement required; Procedural fairness — service, participation and right to be heard; Enforcement — registration of arbitral award as court decree.
|
4 October 2013 |
|
Guarantors cannot enforce a private substitution agreement against the bank; bank may enforce its registered mortgage after borrower default.
Banking law – mortgage security – guarantors bound by registered mortgage deed; variation without bank's written consent invalid. Contract law – privity of contract bars enforcement of private substitution agreements against a non-party bank. Security enforcement – mortgagee entitled to realize security on borrower default; guarantor bears risk of sale of mortgaged property.
|
4 October 2013 |
|
Review application dismissed as redundant and time‑barred; earlier ruling unchallenged within prescribed period.
Civil procedure – Review – Exceptional remedy available for new evidence, mistake apparent on face of record or other sufficient reason; review cannot replace appeal; interim/protective orders and citation of Section 68 CPC; time bar and functus officio where earlier ruling unchallenged.
|
4 October 2013 |
|
Appeal/review and chamber application alleging forged ruling were incompetent; affidavit jurat defective; proceedings struck out with costs.
Civil procedure – competency of appeal/review; forgery allegations against judicial officers – inappropriate forum; Order XLVI r.27 – additional evidence not new issues; affidavit jurat – attesting officer’s name required (rubber stamp insufficient); section 129 – inherent powers sparingly invoked.
|
4 October 2013 |
|
Res judicata covers applications but a dismissal for want of prosecution is not res judicata; incorrect citation rendered the application incompetent.
Civil procedure – res judicata – doctrine applies to applications and interlocutory proceedings but only where prior matter decided on merits; dismissal for want of prosecution does not amount to res judicata; procedural requirement – court must be properly moved and correct statutory provisions cited; wrong citation may render application incompetent.
|
4 October 2013 |
|
Reported
Search and cautioned statement upheld; conviction and sentence for unlawful firearm possession affirmed.
Criminal law – unlawful possession of firearm – search under warrant and presence of independent witness; cautioned statement – admissibility and compliance with statutory safeguards; corroboration by owner’s identification and recovered ammunition; sentence for habitual offender.
|
3 October 2013 |