|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| March 2020 |
|
|
Applicant's uncontested request to correct a clerical error in the court's drawn order was granted without costs.
* Civil procedure — Rectification of judgments and orders — Error apparent on the face of the record — Correction under sections 95, 96 and 97 of the Civil Procedure Code. * Clerical error in drawn order — 'Appeal' to be corrected to 'Application'. * Respondent's non-objection — basis for uncontested correction.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Applicant failed to account for delay; extension of time to seek leave to appeal was refused and application dismissed with costs.
Appellate procedure – Extension of time under s.11(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act – requirement to account for each day’s delay, avoid inordinate delay and demonstrate diligence; late-filed affidavits – leave to file and challenges to authenticity of signatures.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Extension of time denied where applicant failed to account for delay or show sufficient reasons.
Extension of time – requirements to account for delay; not inordinate delay; diligence vs. negligence; point of law/illegality as special reason; missing prior application does not excuse unexplained delay.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Appellant's conviction quashed for insufficient evidence and unlawful conviction in absentia.
Criminal law — Theft — Insufficiency of evidence to link accused to alleged theft; Hearsay evidence — failure of primary informant to testify; Evidence Act — failure to produce exhibit (stolen motorcycle); Criminal Procedure Act s.226(2) — conviction in absence may be set aside where absence beyond accused's control and probable defence exists; Conviction in absentia — miscarriage of justice where procedure and evidence deficient.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Victim’s credible testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, sustained rape conviction; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Rape – Victim’s testimony as primary evidence in sexual offences – medical corroboration; admissibility/weight of hearsay from third parties; minor inconsistencies not fatal to prosecution case; appellate deference to trial court credibility findings.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Application to set aside dismissal order was time-barred under the Law of Limitation Act and dismissed with costs.
Limitation law — Law of Limitation Act s.3(1) and Schedule item 21 (Part III) — application to set aside dismissal order — time bar — mandatory dismissal — Order IX r.3 Civil Procedure Code.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Applicant’s concession to a preliminary objection resulted in the application being struck out and each party bearing its own costs.
Labour law – preliminary objection – applicant’s concession – application struck out – costs: each party to bear its own costs.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Special damages require strict, specific proof; award reduced and general damages increased on reappraisal.
* Civil damages – special damages – must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved – receipts must be itemised and aggregated to support claimed amount. * Motor-vehicle accidents – negligence – criminal admission/conviction for careless driving can support civil liability. * Constitutional right to legal representation – court may proceed where advocate repeatedly absents and discretion under Order XVII properly exercised. * General damages – appellate court may increase quantum where evidence shows significant permanent disability.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Special damages must be strictly proved; court reduced specific damages and increased general damages after reappraising evidence.
Tort – motor vehicle accident – special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved; general damages may be presumed from wrongful act; criminal plea/conviction may support civil negligence finding; court’s discretion under Order XVII to proceed when advocate absents; appellate reappraisal and adjustment of quantum of damages.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Applicant failed to prove good cause for extension of time; affidavit defective and delay unexplained.
* Extension of time – requirement to show good and sufficient cause under section 20(2), Land Disputes Courts Act (Cap.216). * Civil procedure – competence of affidavit – necessity of verification clause and specification of sources of information. * Delay – applicant must account for each day of delay (Bushiri principle). * Evidentiary sufficiency – discharge summary and travel documents must plausibly explain delay.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Applicant charged with manslaughter granted bail pending trial subject to bond, sureties, travel restriction and monthly reporting.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial; Manslaughter as a bailable offence; Application under sections 148(1) and 292A(1)(2) Criminal Procedure Act Cap 20 R.E.2002; Conditions to secure accused’s appearance (bond, sureties, travel restriction, periodic reporting).
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Lower courts wrongly denied letters of administration by conflating the deceased wife’s estate with her husband’s previously administered estate.
Probate and Administration; Primary Court’s role in granting or refusing letters of administration; appointment stage versus administration/substantive ownership; administrator’s duty to exhibit inventory and accounts; improper conflation of spouses’ estates; appellate interference where lower courts misdirect on facts.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
A magistrate lacked jurisdiction to set aside an execution sale using an interlocutory application; High Court nullified that ruling.
Civil procedure — Execution of decree — Sale of immovable property — Correct procedure to challenge execution sale — Interlocutory vs final orders — Order 21 Rule 57(1) (objection proceedings) limited to liability of attachment — Executing court intervention governed by Order 21 Rules 87–92 — Revisional power under section 44(1)(b) Magistrate’s Court Act to nullify proceedings made without jurisdiction.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Court nullified proceedings that wrongly set aside an executed sale, emphasizing correct procedural routes and lack of jurisdiction.
Civil procedure — Execution of decree — Sale of immovable property in execution — Proper remedy to challenge sale — Order 21 Rules 57 and 87–92 CPC — Interlocutory vs final orders — Jurisdictional error — Revision under s.44(1)(b) Magistrate's Court Act.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Possession of ammunition proved by independent witnesses and exhibits; trial-within-a-trial unnecessary without allegation of coercion.
Criminal law – unlawful possession of ammunition – proof beyond reasonable doubt – identification by independent witnesses – certificate of seizure – chain of custody; Evidence Act s.27 – trial-within-a-trial only where voluntariness/coercion of confession/signature alleged; admissibility of exhibits – mere denial insufficient to trigger inquiry.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Application for prerogative relief struck out for failure to exhaust tribunal review remedy under rule 50(1).
Administrative law – judicial review – prerogative orders (certiorari, mandamus) – exhaustion of alternative remedies – review by tribunal under rule 50(1) Fair Competition Rules 2014 – competence of application.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Conviction quashed where missing trial record and conflicting evidence made proof beyond reasonable doubt impossible.
Criminal law – unlawful possession of firearm and ammunition; standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt; missing trial record; contradictions in seizure procedure; unassessable cautioned statement; benefit of doubt; conviction quashed.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Reference was wrongly invoked under Section 77 and Order 41 Cap.33; application struck out with 14 days to refile, no costs.
* Civil procedure — Reference under Section 77 and Order 41 Cap. 33 — Proper scope: limited to uncertainty of usage or question of law requiring High Court interpretation. * Procedural irregularity — Wrong legal provision invoked — Application liable to be struck out. * Relief — Leave to refile within prescribed time; no order as to costs.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
Neither party had locus standi and the tribunal’s decision was quashed; re‑hearing requires letters of administration and locus inspection.
Land law – locus standi in succession and land disputes; necessity of letters of administration; requirement to visit locus in quo where boundaries and extent are disputed; remedy of quashing proceedings where standing and factual ascertainment are defective.
|
25 March 2020 |
|
An out-of-time appeal must be dismissed; the appellant should have applied for extension of time under the Law of Limitation Act.
* Civil procedure – limitation – appeal filed out of time – proper remedy under section 3 of the Law of Limitation Act is dismissal; application for extension of time should be made under section 14(1).
|
24 March 2020 |
|
Conviction quashed where prosecution failed to call victim to identify stolen items, breaching proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Theft – Identification of stolen property – Need to call victim to identify property – Recent possession principle – Failure to summon key witness vitiates conviction.
|
24 March 2020 |
|
An out-of-time criminal appeal was struck out; the applicant must obtain court extensions before refiling.
* Criminal procedure – Appeal time limits – Compliance with section 361(1)(a) and (b) of the Criminal Procedure Act – Effect of filing appeal out of time and requirement to apply for extension of time; consequence that a struck-out appeal renders any earlier notice of appeal inoperative.
|
24 March 2020 |
|
Letters of administration granted to the applicant after proper notice and no caveat being filed.
* Probate and Administration – application for letters of administration – requirement of public citation and Gazette notice – effect of no caveat filed within prescribed period.
|
24 March 2020 |
|
An aided litigant (the appellant) certified exempt from fees is excused from costs under s.31(1) Legal Aid Act; appeal allowed.
* Legal Aid – section 31(1) Legal Aid Act No.1 of 2017 – effect of legal aid representation and fee-exemption certificate on liability for costs.
* Civil procedure – amended plaint with certificate of exemption from fees – jurisdictional implications for trial court.
|
24 March 2020 |
|
An ex‑parte CMA award will not be set aside absent proof the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause.
Labour law – ex‑parte CMA award – setting aside – grounds: non‑service or prevention by sufficient cause – presence of advocate without witnesses insufficient – errors in decision not a ground to set aside.
|
24 March 2020 |
|
Appeal dismissed; victim’s testimony, medical notes and identification evidence sufficiently proved rape.
* Criminal law – Rape – Proof of penetration: victim’s clear account can establish penetration; medical absence of genital injuries not dispositive. * Identification – Visual identification and identification parade: prolonged daylight exposure and corroborative vehicle evidence support reliability. * Evidence – Corroboration: vehicle registration and owner’s testimony corroborate victim. * Procedure – Successor magistrate’s reasons and non-summoning of some witnesses did not vitiate trial.
|
24 March 2020 |
|
Termination for loss of company property was substantively and procedurally fair; CMA Award quashed.
* Labour law – unfair termination – substantive fairness – employer’s proof via internal investigation, CCTV, count sheets and security logbook showing stock variance and unauthorized dispatch.* Labour law – procedural fairness – suspension, hearing and compliance with ELRA and Code of Good Conduct rules.* Evidence – assessment of witness testimony and documentary exhibits; relevance of CCTV and logbook records; hearsay/contention over compellable witness.* Remedy – High Court power to revise and set aside CMA Award; order for compliance with section 44(2) ELRA.
|
24 March 2020 |
|
A litigant's right to legal representation can justify transfer despite statutory pecuniary limits; consent alone cannot confer jurisdiction.
* Civil procedure – transfer of proceedings – party consent does not confer jurisdiction; statutory pecuniary jurisdiction controls transfer. * Constitutional right to legal representation – where advocates are barred from Primary Courts, denial of transfer may infringe right to representation. * Jurisdiction – parties cannot confer jurisdiction by consent. * Improper transfer – transferring to another Primary Court/magistrate requires satisfactory reasons.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Convictions quashed because delayed medical evidence (PF3) lacked connection to the alleged offence, creating reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – burden of proof – medical evidence (PF3) – delay in medical examination – causation and temporal connection – reasonable doubt – acquittal; identification and attendance of key witnesses noted as weaknesses.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Medical evidence unconnected to the alleged incident created reasonable doubt, leading to quashing of the appellants' convictions.
Criminal law – burden of proof – medical evidence (PF3) and doctor's testimony must connect to the charged incident; inconsistencies in timing can create reasonable doubt; identification and failure to call eyewitnesses may further weaken prosecution case.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
A defective jurat under section 10 makes an affidavit incurably defective, rendering the extension application incompetent and struck out.
Criminal procedure – extension of time application supported by affidavit – jurat requirements under section 10 of the Oaths and Statutory Declarations Act – commissioner for oaths must show personal knowledge or identification by a person known to him; failure renders affidavit incurably defective – incompetent applications to be struck out; precedent: Jamal Mstiri @ Chaijaba v Republic (CAT).
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Court allowed extension under s.361(2) to file a corrected Notice of Appeal and ordered supply of judgment and proceedings.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time to file Notice of Appeal – section 361(2) Criminal Procedure Act – good cause required.
* Defective Notice of Appeal – wrong lower court case number – effect on appeal proceedings.
* Right to appeal – supply of copies of judgment and proceedings for appeal purposes.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Court upheld jurisdiction, noted evidentiary defects, and adjusted division of matrimonial property to 60/40 in respondent’s favor.
Family law – divorce – jurisdictional requirement of conciliation-board certificate under Law of Marriage Act s.101; Evidence – witnesses of tender years – statutory promise to tell the truth (Evidence Act s.127(2)) vs voire dire; Admissibility of exhibits – unmarked/unadmitted salary slip inadmissible; Matrimonial property – division under Law of Marriage Act s.114(1) – apportionment of shares (60:40).
|
23 March 2020 |
|
The appeal was struck out because the out-of-time notice and petition were filed without prior leave; the timely notice was procedurally defective.
Criminal procedure — Notice of intention to appeal — Time limit under section 361(1)(a) CPA — Defective notice (improper title) — Filing notice and petition out of time requires prior leave — Failure to seek leave renders appeal non-existent and justifies striking out.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Reported
Leave for judicial review refused: application struck out for lack of arguable case, unclear reliefs and insufficient interest.
* Administrative law – Judicial review v. appeal – Section 27(1C) Industrial Court Act; appropriate remedy to challenge Industrial Court awards and decisions.
* Judicial review – Leave stage – requirement to show an arguable case and sufficient interest; leave as a screening device.
* Civil procedure – Representative applicants – disclosure and procedural requirements (rule 4) including signed lists and notice to represented persons.
* Natural justice – Alleged bias by presiding chairman – whether presiding over related proceedings breaches fairness.
* Reliefs – Certiorari/mandamus – clarity and specificity of grounds and prayers at leave stage.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Waiting for judgment copies can justify some delay, but failure to account for subsequent delay warrants dismissal of extension application.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time to lodge appeal – waiting for copies of judgment and proceedings may justify initial exclusion from time computation; applicant must account for each day of subsequent delay (Bushiri principle). * Civil/criminal procedure – requirements of affidavit and inadmissibility of new facts raised in rejoinder.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Failure to specify the offence and law in a conviction renders the appellant's judgment and sentence a nullity.
Criminal procedure – Conviction must state the offence and statutory provision (s.312(2) CPA) – Failure to enter proper conviction is fatal – Judgment and sentence nullity – Remedy: remit to trial court for proper judgment and conviction.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
A prisoner’s appeal may be admitted out of time where a defective notice prepared by prison officers caused delay.
Criminal procedure – extension of time under s.361(2) CPA – good cause – defective Notice of Appeal titled in wrong court – prisoner filings via officer in charge (s.363) – discretion exercised in favour of appellant.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Bail improperly denied where magistrate relied on unproven political assumptions; discretion must rest on material facts.
Criminal procedure – Bail – Section 148(5)(d) CPR – Custody for protection/safety – Judicial discretion must be exercised on material facts – Improper reliance on unproven political antagonism amounts to illegitimate basis for refusing bail.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Bail denied where accused charged with trafficking over 20kg cannabis and DCEA/EOCA statutory provisions bar bail.
* Criminal procedure — Bail — Drugs Control and Enforcement Act (DCEA) s.29(1)(b) — trafficking cannabis of 20 kg or more bars bail.
* Economic and Organised Crime Control Act (EOCA) s.36(4)(f) — bars bail for offences under DCEA.
* Specific drug legislation displaces general Criminal Procedure Act provisions for bail in drug cases.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Appeal allowed where unchallenged defence evidence and material contradictions, plus an unread PF3, defeated proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Evidence – Documentary evidence (PF3) must be read over to accused upon admission; failure may prejudice the accused and warrant expunction. Contradictions between eyewitness and medical testimony can be material and resolve in favour of the accused. Unchallenged defence witnesses who place accused away from scene weaken prosecution’s case. Credibility of friendly witnesses must be carefully assessed where grudges exist. Standard of proof: beyond reasonable doubt.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Appeal struck out as time-barred; appellant’s unverified claim of earlier filing rejected for lack of affidavit evidence.
Civil procedure — Limitation — Appeal filed out of time without leave; need for affidavit evidence to explain delay; missing court documents do not excuse lateness without proof; striking out time-barred appeals.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Judicial review dismissed where grounds were unverified or attacked merits, and no bias was shown in the chair presiding.
* Judicial review – prerogative orders (certiorari, mandamus) – limits of review: error of law apparent on face of record versus re-evaluation of evidence/merits.
* Procedural competence – requirement for affidavit verification and leave under rule 8(1)(a); effect of failing to implead Attorney General.
* Administrative law – natural justice/bias – composition of Industrial Court and statutory requirement for Chairman to preside under section 27(1A).
* Remedy – where grounds are unverified or invite merits review, judicial review will be refused.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Applicant charged with unlawful possession of government trophies granted bail on cash/immovable security and sureties under EOCCA.
Bail — Economic and Organized Crime Control Act s29(4)(d) and s36(5)(a) — deposit of half the value of subject matter exceeding Tshs.10,000,000 — sharing principle where offences committed jointly — cash or immovable property security and bonds/sureties — jurisdiction and attendance conditions.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
A beneficiary lacks locus standi to sue over land forming part of a deceased’s estate; only the administrator/executor may do so.
* Succession and land law – disputed land part of deceased’s estate – only executor or administrator may institute proceedings concerning estate property.
* Locus standi – beneficiary lacks locus to sue on behalf of the estate absent appointment as administrator/executor.
* Civil procedure – revisional powers – High Court nullifies proceedings erroneously brought in absence of administrator (s.43 Land Disputes Courts Act).
* Executability – where suit concerns estate property, proper administration is prerequisite to valid, executable orders.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Failing to determine preliminary objections before hearing an appeal denies the right to be heard and vitiates proceedings.
Civil procedure – Preliminary objections – Must be determined before the substantive hearing – Failure to decide preliminary objections vitiates proceedings and denies right to be heard. Appeal from Primary Court – procedural compliance and limitation issues raised but not decided. Remedy – quash and remit to district court for fresh determination by another magistrate.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Equal division upheld for shop and household items; house and vehicle found to be respondent's separate property; appeal partly allowed.
Family law – presumption of marriage and division of property under s.114(2)(b) Law of Marriage Act; evidence of contribution to matrimonial assets; property acquired before partnership or with separate funds not divisible; civil standard for allegations akin to fraud; appellate restraint where lower courts have concurrent findings.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Court upheld nighttime identification due to prolonged observation, prior acquaintance and corroboration; appeal dismissed.
Criminal law – Visual identification at night – Waziri Amani test: eliminate possibilities of mistaken identity; consider duration of observation, distance, lighting, and prior acquaintance; corroboration strengthens identification. Criminal procedure – Failure to cross‑examine on a material point (use of a different name) may be treated as acceptance and estop later challenge.
|
23 March 2020 |
|
Conviction overturned where identification was unreliable and cautioned statement was unlawfully recorded and not acted upon.
Criminal law — Identification evidence — Visual identification at night — compliance with Waziri Amani requirements; Criminal procedure — Cautioned statements — Timing under s.50(1)(a) Criminal Procedure Act and admissibility; Requirement to clear and read admitted statements in court (Robinson Mwanjisi); Conviction cannot rest on suspicion alone.
|
23 March 2020 |