|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| June 2019 |
|
|
The applicant’s review was time‑barred, procedurally defective and supported by an inadequate affidavit, so dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure — Review — Limitation: paragraph 3, Part III of the Law of Limitation Act (30 days) — time barred; Procedure — review must be by memorandum of review under Order XLII, not chamber summons; Affidavit requirements — Order XIX r.3(1) and Order XLIII r.2 — defective affidavit renders application incompetent; Failure to show good cause for delay in filing submissions.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Review application dismissed as time‑barred, procedurally incompetent and supported by a defective affidavit.
Limitation law – review applications – paragraph 3 Part III of the Schedule to the Law of Limitation Act; time bar and section 3(1). Civil procedure – review procedure – requirement to file a memorandum of review under Order XLII and sections 78(a), 95 of the Civil Procedure Code. Civil procedure – affidavits – requirements under Order XIX Rule 3(1) and Order XLIII Rule 2; incurably defective affidavit. Procedure – preliminary objections and failure to show cause for delay in filing submissions.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Unlawful eviction without court order or notice entitles occupants to general damages; special damages require strict proof.
Land law — Illegal eviction — Eviction carried out without court order or notice — Pending Land Tribunal matter withdrawn after eviction — Proof of special damages requires strict, admissible evidence — General damages awarded for unlawful eviction and humiliation.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Alleged estate misappropriation unproven; administrator ordered to file updated account including bank details within 14 days.
Probate — inspection/revocation of final account under s.107(5) Probate and Administration of Estates Act; Allegations of misappropriation — burden of proof on beneficiaries; Administrator’s powers — wide but custodial, cannot appropriate estate; Sufficiency of final account — income, expenditure and loan repayment details; Need for updated account where material omissions or passage of time and unaccounted bank accounts (NBC, CRDB); Application of Islamic law in High Court — s.92(1)(b); High Court inherent powers to order justice — s.95 CPC.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Application to set aside dismissal for want of prosecution struck out for wrong/ inapplicable citation of enabling provision.
Civil Procedure – application to set aside dismissal for want of prosecution – competency and correct enabling provision – Order IX Rule 4 v Rule 9(1) – Rule 9 applies to dismissals under Rule 8, not to dismissals for non-appearance/default.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Family-nominated administrator valid without proprietary interest; revocation remedy lies in Primary Court, not by appeal.
Administration of estates – Primary Court (Administration of Estates) Rules GN 49/1971 applicable – Probate Rules not applicable; Appointment of administrator – family/clan nomination valid under Rule 2(a) of Fifth Schedule – administrator need not have proprietary interest; Appellate scope – no interference with concurrent findings absent misapprehension or miscarriage of justice; Appellate procedure – new facts not admissible on appeal; Remedy – revocation of appointment lies in Primary Court under Rule 9(1)(e).
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Appellant's challenge to sufficiency of evidence and chain of custody failed; conviction for possession of government trophies upheld.
Criminal law – Unlawful possession of government trophies; evidential sufficiency of seizure certificate and physical exhibits; chain of custody and non-tendered property; materiality of discrepancies in quantity of seized items; admissibility and weight of uncrossed cautioned statements.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Conviction for abuse of office quashed where prosecution failed to prove authority, misconduct and vote evidence beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Corruption – Abuse of office (s.31, Prevention and Combating of Corruption Act No.11/2007) – requirement that prosecution prove authority and wrongful use of position beyond reasonable doubt; Evidence – necessity of tendering material exhibits (alleged vote results) and documentary/swearing evidence to establish responsibility and authority; Conviction unsafe where prosecution evidence is scanty or fails to establish essential elements of offence.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Interim injunction refused: triable trademark issues existed but irreparable harm and balance of convenience were not established.
Interim relief – Temporary injunction – application of Attilio v Mbowe test: triable issues, irreparable harm, balance of convenience. Trade marks – alleged passing off and infringement – role of registration and s.32(4) of Trade and Services Marks Act. Evidence – quantification of loss vs irreparable injury; requirement for supporting audited accounts. Balance of convenience – protection of local industry and potential prejudice to registered users.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Conviction based solely on weak night-time visual identification and inadmissible child testimony was quashed and sentence set aside.
Criminal law – Evidence – Visual identification at night – Requirements and safeguards (Waziri Aman principles); Evidence Act s.26A(2) – Witness of tender years – necessity of promise to tell the truth; Conviction unsafe where based solely on weak, uncorroborated visual identification.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Ex-parte enforcement of a staff loan: termination converted concessional interest to commercial rate and judgement awarded principal, interest, damages and costs.
Contract/Banking law - staff loan agreement; conversion of concessional staff rate to commercial rate upon termination; ex-parte recovery of unpaid loan; awards of contractual and post-judgment interest; general damages and costs.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Failure to attach the impugned ruling and prove illegality prevents grant of leave to appeal for extension of time.
Leave to appeal; extension of time to file appeal; late supply of decree; representation by unqualified/impersonating advocate; illegality as ground for extension; burden of proof under Evidence Act s110; failure to attach impugned ruling; expungement of late written submissions.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Convictions quashed where visual identification, possession evidence and delayed cautioned statements were found legally unsafe.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – visual/recognition evidence at night; necessity of description, source and intensity of light, contemporaneous disclosure and elimination of mistaken identity. Criminal procedure – Cautioned statements – recording within prescribed time and compliance with statutory safeguards; inadmissibility if statutory requirements flouted. Evidence – Recovery of stolen property – prosecution’s burden to prove ownership and connection to theft; effect of accused’s receipts/explanation. Criminal law – Common intention – proof cannot rest on unreliable identification or inadmissible confessions.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
Applicant granted 30-day extension to appeal due to prompt pursuit of records and diligence correcting record errors.
Limitation Act s.14(1) – extension of time – "sufficient cause"; promptness and diligence in pursuing certified copies and correcting record errors. Procedural irregularity – supply and rectification of certified records. Effect of earlier incompetent extension application on merits of subsequent application.
|
28 June 2019 |
|
A bona fide purchaser was properly joined to pending land suits under Order I r.10 and section 95 to protect his interests.
Civil procedure — Joinder of parties — Order I Rules 10(2) & (4) and section 95 CPC — Bona fide purchaser seeking to be joined in pending land suits — Necessity for effective and complete adjudication.
|
27 June 2019 |
|
|
27 June 2019 |
|
Application for interim release of containers dismissed due to evidentiary inconsistencies and unmet injunction requirements.
Civil procedure – interlocutory injunction – prerequisites (triable issues, irreparable injury, balance of convenience); Evidence – weight and admissibility of unsigned documents and inconsistent annexures; Contract – right to withhold goods under commercial agreement; Possession/dispute over storage and demurrage charges.
|
27 June 2019 |
|
Medical report and lack of corroboration led to quashing the appellant's rape conviction despite the victim's testimony.
Criminal law – Rape – burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt; weight of victim's testimony versus medical (expert) evidence; PF3 and doctor’s report showing no recent penetration; need for corroboration/independent witnesses; assessment of totality of evidence.
|
27 June 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed where unreliable night-time identification and inconsistent evidence failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – visual identification at night – necessity to describe light source, intensity and observer distance. Identification parade – collateral value only; ineffective without prior witness description. Burden of proof – inconsistencies in prosecution evidence (identity and stolen item) create reasonable doubt.
|
27 June 2019 |
|
Applicant's extension of time to seek leave to appeal dismissed for unexplained delay and misconceived relief.
Extension of time – discretionary power – requirement to demonstrate good cause – every day of delay must be accounted for; misconceived application – attempt to pursue second appeal/leave improperly framed; unnecessary delay awaiting supply of records.
|
27 June 2019 |
|
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution after the prosecuting authority failed to trace or effectively serve the respondent.
Criminal procedure – Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution where respondent untraceable after prolonged delay and failed service attempts (including publication). Service by publication – ineffectual where respondent remains unlocated; court may dismiss appeal to prevent indefinite pendency. Duty on prosecuting authority to diligently pursue and allocate persons whose presence is necessary; courts are not tasked with mobilising parties. Dismissal without prejudice – liberty to refile if respondent resurfaces.
|
26 June 2019 |
|
A prior constitutional ruling upholding section 36(2) precludes another applicant from re-litigating the same issue as res judicata.
Constitutional law – res judicata in public interest litigation; prior judgment in rem binds the public; application to s.36(2) Economic and Organised Crimes Control Act; reliance on Fikiri Liganga and Indian jurisprudence.
|
26 June 2019 |
|
An unsigned trial judgment is incurably defective and must be quashed and the record remitted for a fresh signed judgment.
Criminal procedure – requirement that judgments be signed by presiding officer – section 312(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act – unsigned judgment is incurably defective and a nullity. Appeal procedure – competency of appeal where impugned trial judgment is unsigned – quashing and remitting record for fresh judgment under section 373(1)(a). Remedial orders – remit for fresh judgment rather than retrospective signature; custody pending compliance and credit for time served on any subsequent sentence.
|
26 June 2019 |
|
The arbitrator was improperly joined and struck out; Rule 8's certification requirement for award and submission was satisfied.
Arbitration — joinder — whether a sole arbitrator may be made respondent in proceedings challenging an arbitral award — arbitrator generally not a proper party and immune from being made respondent.* Arbitration Rules (Rule 8) — certification requirement — certified copies of the submission to the arbitrator and the award are required and were provided.* Civil Procedure (O.1 r.10(2)) — Court power to strike out improperly joined parties.
|
26 June 2019 |
|
Plaintiff injured in vehicle accident proved 5% permanent disability and special damages; general damages reduced for lack of evidential support.
Tort — Motor vehicle accident — negligence and vicarious liability of employer; proof of special damages by receipts; assessment of general damages for pain, suffering and partial permanent disability (5%); evidential requirement for claims of lost earnings; award of interest and costs.
|
25 June 2019 |
|
Application for revocation of letters of administration struck out for being improperly moved and wrongly grounded in law, no costs.
Probate and Administration – Revocation of letters of administration – Preliminary objections – Whether the court has been properly moved; compliance with High Court (Registry) Rules r.8; adequacy of supporting affidavit; correct statutory basis (Section 51(1)(d)) – Application struck out, no order as to costs.
|
25 June 2019 |
|
Municipality entitled to 0.3% service levy on net turnover; defendant’s unproven cess payment did not discharge liability.
Local Government Finance Act (Cap. 290) and municipal by-laws – service levy of 0.3% on turnover net of VAT and excise; municipal recovery of unpaid levy; whether payment of farmgate cess discharges municipal service levy – evidentiary burden to prove cess payment; proper calculation requires correct exchange rates and deduction of VAT; award of interest at bank rate and costs.
|
25 June 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed where cautioned statement was wrongly admitted and possession/identification of stolen goods was not proved.
Criminal law – shop breaking and stealing – cautioned statement repudiation and trial court's duty to inquire – recent possession doctrine – identification of stolen property by special marks – insufficiency of witness corroboration – conviction quashed.
|
25 June 2019 |
|
Application to stay execution and vacate consent decree dismissed as court was functus officio and the application was omnibus.
Civil procedure — functus officio — consent decree and execution; omnibus application — combining distinct reliefs improper; incorrect legal provisions — court improperly moved; appropriate remedies are review/revision or fresh suit.
|
25 June 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed because the charge failed to allege unlawfulness, an essential ingredient of causing grievous harm; retrial ordered.
Criminal law – Charging particulars – causing grievous harm – requirement to allege "unlawfully" as essential ingredient under section 225 – omission renders charge defective and conviction unsafe. Fair trial – charge must disclose essential elements to enable defence. Remedy – quashing of conviction and remittal for retrial after proper charge prepared.
|
24 June 2019 |
|
The applicant proved a loan, valid securities and respondents' default, securing judgment and power to sell collateral.
Facility agreement — Existence and enforceability; Identity of lender despite minor name discrepancy; Security instruments — mortgage, specific debenture, chattel mortgage and personal guarantees; Default and certificate of balance; Decretal interest rates and power of sale of collateral.
|
24 June 2019 |
|
An unsigned trial court judgment is incurably irregular and must be quashed and remitted for a properly signed judgment.
Criminal procedure – requirement to sign judgment (s.312 Criminal Procedure Act) – failure to sign is an incurable irregularity – certified/printed copy cannot substitute for an original signed judgment – remedy: quash and remit for composition and signing of fresh judgment – remand pending compliance – credit time served.
|
24 June 2019 |
|
Failure to establish chain of custody of seized trophies and improper tendering of cautioned statements defeated the prosecution’s case.
Criminal law – possession of government trophies – chain of custody and Police General Orders (Directive 15) – failure to account for movement of exhibits is a fatal irregularity; evidentiary rule – documents/exhibits must be tendered by a witness with knowledge or custody; burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; doubts resolved in favour of accused.
|
24 June 2019 |
|
|
24 June 2019 |
|
Court dismissed respondent's preliminary objections as raising factual or non-mandatory procedural issues, not pure points of law.
Civil procedure — Preliminary objections — Must raise a pure point of law (Mukisa test) — Factual issues not competent as preliminary objections. Locus standi — Alleged sale/transfer of disputed land — Factual inquiry required; not a pure law point. Land Registration Act, s.13 — Notice of objection to first registration — applicability and mandatory nature require factual evaluation. Corporate plaintiff — Capacity to sue in corporate name; verification of pleadings by corporate officers (Order XXVIII r.1; Order VI r.15) — identification desirable but permissive.
|
24 June 2019 |
|
Conviction quashed where circumstantial evidence, lack of corroborative mobile-banking records and variance between charge and evidence undermined proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – circumstantial evidence – identification and corroboration – necessity of linking facts beyond reasonable doubt; Variance between charge and evidence – fatal and incurable defect; Burden of proof rests on prosecution.
|
24 June 2019 |
|
|
21 June 2019 |
|
Court granted extension under s14(1) after finding the applicant explained and justified the delay in filing the review.
Limitation Act s14(1) – extension of time – sufficiency of reasons for delay; diligence vs negligence of advocate; requirement to attach impugned order to review application; late invocation of illegality in submissions.
|
21 June 2019 |
|
Applicant granted extension to appeal after court found diligence and arguable illegality despite counsel's errors.
• Civil procedure – extension of time – applicant must account for each day of delay; good cause required. • Advocate negligence – not automatically fatal; may be excused where applicant diligently pursued remedies. • Illegality in lower court decision – arguable illegality can justify extension. • Relief granted: extension to file appeal within prescribed period.
|
21 June 2019 |
|
Court granted extension of time to file appeal where defective decree and interest of justice justified the delay.
Civil procedure — Extension of time — Section 14(1) Law of Limitation Act; Order XLIII Rule 2 CPC; discretionary relief — requirement of reasonable or sufficient cause; defective decree and alleged illegality as factors attracting court's consideration; interest of justice and constitutional right of appeal.
|
21 June 2019 |
|
Whether the applicants should be granted leave to appeal on the legal issue of ownership of the motor vehicle.
Appellate procedure – leave to appeal under s.5(1)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – requirement of contentious point of law. Civil appeals – whether High Court misdirected itself by awarding damages to a party alleged not to be the lawful owner. Right of appeal – Article 13(6)(a) Constitution – entitlement to have contentious legal issues determined by Court of Appeal. Procedural fairness – where High Court does not decide on merits, the question raises a point of law for appellate review.
|
21 June 2019 |
|
Whether division and sale of matrimonial houses fairly reflected contributions while protecting children's interests.
Matrimonial property division – Section 114(2)(d) Law of Marriage Act – equality of division – protection of children’s interests – avoidance of forced sale of family home – recognition of domestic contributions – loans as joint contribution only if for joint benefit – appellate standards on concurrent findings.
|
21 June 2019 |
|
Applicant's illness and alleged illegality did not justify extension of time; application dismissed for unexplained delay.
Civil procedure – Extension of time under Law of Limitation Act s.14(1) – necessity to show sufficient reasons and account for each day of delay; Medical evidence – brief outpatient attendance/short admission insufficient to excuse lengthy delay; Illegality of decision – may justify extension in appropriate cases but does not remedy unexplained delay.
|
20 June 2019 |
|
Failure to file the mandatory Section 102(1)(a) notice renders the appeal incompetent and it was struck out with costs.
Land Registration Act s.102(1)(a) – mandatory Notice of Intention to Appeal – requirement to notify Registrar and High Court within one month. Procedural law – competence of appeal – failure to comply with mandatory notice renders appeal incompetent. Overriding objective – not available to cure non‑compliance with mandatory statutory preconditions. Civil procedure – expungement of withdrawn submissions from record.
|
20 June 2019 |
|
A temporary injunction application in probate proceedings abated on the applicant’s death as the right to sue did not survive.
Civil Procedure Code (Order XXII Rule 1) – Abatement of suit on party’s death – Survival of right to sue – Probate proceedings – Temporary injunction pending revocation of letters of administration.
|
20 June 2019 |
|
Taxation reduced the bill to Tshs.28,570,000; 3% instruction fee allowed; unsupported disbursement disallowed.
Advocates' fees — application of Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015 (9th Schedule) — instruction fee calculation where specific monetary claim — effect of defendant having filed a defence but later defaulting — taxation of attendance costs and disbursements — requirement of supporting receipts for disbursements.
|
20 June 2019 |
|
Extension of time and leave to appeal granted where delay arose from technical defects and applicant’s prompt pursuit of remedies.
Appellate procedure – extension of time under section 11(1) AJA – sufficient cause – factors: length of delay, reason, diligence and prejudice; technical defects by lay litigant can constitute sufficient cause; late procedural objections not raised in pleadings may be disallowed.
|
20 June 2019 |
|
|
20 June 2019 |
|
Subordinate court trial was a nullity where statutory DPP consent for prosecution in a lower court was absent.
Criminal procedure – jurisdiction – requirement of Director of Public Prosecutions’ consent under section 26 of the Economic and Organized Crime Control Act – absence of DPP consent renders subordinate court trial a nullity.
|
20 June 2019 |
|
Five-year unexplained delay and lack of diligence defeated the application to extend time for review; s.19(5) exclusion not justified.
Limitation of actions – extension of time under Law of Limitation Act s.14(1) – discretion must be judiciously exercised and based on material cause. Exclusion of time for obtaining proceedings – s.19(5) – applicant must show necessity and inability to obtain copies timely. Delay – distinction between technical and inordinate delay; requirement to account for each day (Bushiri, Lyamuya, Fortunatus Masha). Diligence vs negligence – absence of diligence and gross negligence disentitle applicant to extension.
|
20 June 2019 |