|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2008 |
|
|
Plaintiff proved breach of a loan agreement and was awarded the outstanding principal and statutory post‑judgment interest.
* Contract/Loan – breach of loan agreement – proof by documentary and oral evidence – reconciliation statement and admission letter establish indebtedness.
* Civil procedure – ex parte proceedings after service by publication – entitlement to judgment where defendant absent.
* Interest – unpleaded interest from date of filing to judgment not recoverable; post-judgment interest governed by Order XX Rule 21(1) CPC (7% p.a.).
* Costs – successful plaintiff entitled to costs.
|
28 December 2008 |
|
Convictions for armed robbery and sexual assault upheld on reliable identification and corroborative evidence.
Criminal law – identification of accused – eyewitness knowledge and daylight identification; Armed robbery – section 287A Penal Code – proof beyond reasonable doubt; Sexual offences – substitution of attempted rape with sexual assault – section 135(1) Penal Code; Evidence – corroboration and resolving minor contradictions; Sentence – concurrent sentences upheld.
|
12 December 2008 |
|
An appeal filed out of time without prior leave is irregular where the district court granted leave by ruling absent a formal application and affidavit.
* Civil procedure – Appeals – limitation – Appeals to district court must be filed within 30 days (Magistrates' Courts Act s.20(3)); extension requires application under s.20(4)(a).
* Procedural requirements – application for leave to file out of time must be by formal application supported by affidavit and served on the other party; ruling without such application is irregular.
* Filing out of time – an appeal filed without prior leave is improperly before the court and may be struck from the record.
|
4 December 2008 |
|
A right of appeal does not automatically bar High Court judicial review; interlocutory orders can be subject to certiorari or mandamus.
Administrative law – prerogative remedies (certiorari, mandamus) – availability despite existence of appeal; interlocutory orders – not immune from judicial review despite Act No.25 of 2002 amendments; High Court’s inherent supervisory jurisdiction preserved.
|
4 December 2008 |
| November 2008 |
|
|
Absence of sperm in medical report does not defeat rape conviction where credible eyewitnesses corroborate the victim.
Criminal law – Rape: penetration is the essential actus reus; medical proof (spermatozoa) is desirable but not conclusive. Eyewitness corroboration and victim’s testimony can establish rape beyond reasonable doubt. Accused’s silence at trial weakens after‑the‑fact alternative explanations.
|
26 November 2008 |
|
Eyewitness corroboration can sustain a rape conviction despite absence of medical proof; appeal dismissed.
* Criminal law – Rape – Proof of penetration as actus reus; medical evidence is best but not conclusive. * Evidentiary law – Corroboration by eyewitnesses; credibility and demeanour findings of trial court entitled to deference. * Criminal procedure – Effect of accused’s silence at trial; new defences raised on appeal may be treated as afterthoughts.
|
26 November 2008 |
|
A district court lacks territorial jurisdiction over causes arising outside its district, warranting dismissal despite limitation arguments.
Civil procedure – limitation of actions – malicious prosecution – accrual on acquittal; Territorial jurisdiction – district courts limited to their district – Magistrates' Courts Act s.4; Pleadings determine locus of cause of action and jurisdiction.
|
24 November 2008 |
|
Criminal convictions quashed for insufficient evidence; civil claimant held entitled to 25 shares and awarded TSh 110,000,000 plus interest.
Criminal law – sufficiency of evidence – robbery with violence – proof of violence and amount. Company law (commercial) – share allotment and membership – condition precedent to payment, estoppel, surrender of shares, entitlement to dividends, reliance on verification/audit report to quantify profits.
|
13 November 2008 |
|
The court upheld concurrent acquittals, finding the prosecution failed to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – burden of proof – prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; Criminal procedure – appellate review – interference with concurrent findings only for misapprehension of evidence, miscarriage of justice or legal error; Evidence – sufficiency for theft – mere sighting of cattle at night insufficient to prove breaking and stealing; Civil remedy – estate/inheritance dispute should be pursued by civil action by administratrix.
|
7 November 2008 |
|
Concurrent acquittals upheld because prosecution failed to prove theft beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – sufficiency of evidence – burden on prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; concurrent findings of fact – appellate interference only for misapprehension, miscarriage of justice or legal/procedural error; consideration of defence evidence; civil remedy for disputed estate property.
|
7 November 2008 |
| October 2008 |
|
|
Applicant’s appeal partly allowed: district court jurisdiction upheld; Industrial Court interprets awards; packaging entitlement depends on salary scale.
* Labour law – jurisdiction – District Court may entertain labour disputes reported by a labour officer; High Court has no original jurisdiction over trade disputes.
* Industrial Court awards – registration – a registered voluntary redundancy agreement is binding and governs entitlements.
* Interpretation of awards – only the Industrial Court may interpret its registered awards; lower courts act ultra vires if they attempt to do so.
* Evidence – claimants must prove monetary claims (repatriation costs) with documentary evidence; oral testimony alone insufficient.
* Procedure – decree in labour matters may set a formula for computation of awards rather than exact figures where appropriate.
|
10 October 2008 |
| September 2008 |
|
|
|
17 September 2008 |
|
The appellant trustees lawfully exercised powers; respondents failed to prove demolition illegitimate; appeal allowed.
* Trusts/Bakwata constitution – trustees’ wide discretionary powers to manage trust property – courts inquire into legitimacy not wisdom of trustees’ decisions.
* Civil procedure – representative suits – Rule 8, Order 1 leave required before suing on behalf of others.
* Burden of proof – respondents must prove lack of internal consent or illegitimacy of trustees’ decision.
* Locus standi – beneficiaries may act to preserve trust property even without proving specific monetary contributions.
|
17 September 2008 |
|
Court granted applicant six-month extension of temporary injunction from 5 Sept 2008 with no order as to costs.
Civil procedure – Extension of injunction – Application for extension of time of a temporary injunction – Consent/unopposed application – Extension effective from date of ruling – No order as to costs.
|
5 September 2008 |
|
Court quashed district court restoration order for lack of jurisdiction and violation of the applicant's right to be heard.
Criminal procedure — Attachment and sale of judgment debtor's property — Objections to attachment — Right to be heard — Jurisdiction of appellate district court — Granting relief beyond pleadings — Necessity of inter partes hearing and independent evidence where parties are related.
|
3 September 2008 |
| August 2008 |
|
|
Conviction set aside where prosecution failed to prove robbery beyond reasonable doubt and trial court ignored defence evidence.
* Criminal law – robbery with violence – whether prosecution proved offence beyond reasonable doubt – materiality of contradictions in prosecution witnesses’ evidence – duty of trial court to evaluate and give due weight to defence evidence.
|
26 August 2008 |
|
The appellate court quashed conviction for robbery with violence due to inadequate consideration of the appellant's defence and weak evidence.
Criminal law – robbery with violence – sufficiency of evidence – contradictions in prosecution witnesses – failure by trial court to give due weight to accused’s defence – unsafe conviction – appellate intervention.
|
26 August 2008 |
|
Conviction in absentia valid where accused went at large, but upon arrest accused must be brought before court under section 226(2).
* Criminal procedure – Trial in absence – Application of section 226(1) where accused goes at large – validity of conviction in absentia.
* Criminal procedure – Arrest after conviction in absentia – Requirement to bring accused before convicting court under section 226(2) to show cause.
* Criminal procedure – Procedural irregularity – consigning arrested accused to prison without affording section 226(2) hearing goes to root of justice.
* Evidence – Corroboration of victim’s testimony by independent witnesses and medical exhibit supports conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
|
22 August 2008 |
|
Absence of a court-fixed Speed Track does not automatically render a suit incompetent or justify striking it out.
* Civil procedure – Case management – Speed Track (O. VIII A r.3(1)) – Court’s duty to ascertain Speed Track within prescribed time – Failure to fix Speed Track does not automatically render suit incompetent. * Remedy – aggrieved party should seek revision rather than striking out when the court omits to determine Speed Track. * Distinction from cases where Speed Track had been fixed and deadlines expired.
|
18 August 2008 |
|
Court restored a criminal appeal dismissed for counsel's non-appearance, finding dismissal unjustly punished the appellant.
Criminal procedure – restoration of appeal dismissed for non-appearance – duty to ensure appellant personally notified where counsel defaults – dismissal may unfairly punish appellant – exercise of discretion to restore appeal; constitutional and procedural fairness considerations (Art. 107A(2)(e)).
|
13 August 2008 |
|
Where an advocate's non-appearance causes dismissal, the court may restore the appeal and should consider personally serving the appellant to avoid injustice.
Criminal procedure — Restoration of appeal dismissed for non-appearance of counsel — Court should consider personal service on appellant where advocate fails to appear — Procedural technicalities must not produce injustice; constitutional considerations relevant.
|
13 August 2008 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause for extension of time to file notice of appeal; application dismissed with costs.
Extension of time – appellate procedure – application under s.11(1) AJA and Rule 44 – requirement to show sufficient cause – court’s discretion – prospects of success as relevant factor – litigant’s conduct and failure to keep contact with counsel or registry – jurisdictional point not raised in memorandum of appeal (Order XXXIX r.2) considered and rejected.
|
13 August 2008 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause or real prospects of success; extension of time to appeal dismissed with costs.
* Civil procedure — extension of time to file notice of intention to appeal — sufficient cause required — discretion to be exercised judicially. * Applicant's negligence or failure to keep contact with advocate/registry evidences lack of reasonable cause. * Prospects of success of intended appeal are relevant; appellate court may refuse extension where intended ground lacks merit or was already considered.
|
13 August 2008 |
|
Applicant’s unexplained, uncorroborated delay in filing appeal documents failed to show sufficient cause for enlargement of time.
* Criminal procedure – extension of time – applicant must show sufficient cause to file notice of intention and appeal out of time.
* Filing notice of intention to appeal – not required to be accompanied by judgment – prison authority’s refusal to assist must be proved.
* Evidence – allegations against prison or registry officials require supporting affidavits or independent evidence.
* Delay – unsupported or uncorroborated explanations do not establish sufficient cause.
|
5 August 2008 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause for extension of time to file notice and appeal; application dismissed.
Criminal procedure — Extension of time to file notice of intention to appeal and appeal — Applicant must show sufficient cause — Alleged non-supply of High Court judgment and lack of prison assistance not persuasive without corroborating affidavits — Notice of intention to appeal does not require production of judgment.
|
5 August 2008 |
| July 2008 |
|
|
Conviction based on unsafe night-time visual identification was quashed and omnibus sentence set aside.
Criminal law – Visual identification – Identification at night – Need to eliminate possibility of mistaken identity (Waziri standard) – Insufficiency of single-witness identification where witness had no prior acquaintance and did not explain lighting – Omnibus sentence irregularity.
|
30 July 2008 |
|
Convictions quashed as unsafe due to unreliable visual identification; omnibus sentencing irregularity noted.
* Criminal law – Visual identification – Evidence of visual identification is weak and unsafe unless surrounding circumstances (duration, distance, lighting, prior acquaintance) are carefully considered.
* Criminal law – Burden of proof – Conviction cannot stand where identification is not established beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal procedure – Sentencing – Omnibus sentence irregularity; separate sentences should ordinarily be imposed for each count.
|
30 July 2008 |
|
Confession and recent-possession evidence upheld burglary convictions; duplicate counts expunged and one unproven count acquitted.
Criminal law – Burglary – possession of recently stolen property – doctrine of recent possession; confessions – voluntariness and retracted confession corroborated by independent evidence; duplicity in charging – expunging duplicate counts under s.388 Criminal Procedure Act; appellate power to make findings where trial court omitted them.
|
21 July 2008 |
| June 2008 |
|
|
Application for pre-judgment arrest/security in a land dispute dismissed for lack of statutory jurisdiction and insufficient evidence.
Civil procedure – pre-judgment arrest/security – Order XXXVII (36) Rule 1 – inapplicability to suits concerning immovable property (s.14(a)–(d)) – jurisdictional limits – requirement to prove impending absconding or disposal of property – inadmissibility of hearsay where source not disclosed.
|
12 June 2008 |
| April 2008 |
|
|
Appeal dismissed: village allocation and respondent’s possession proved; lower tribunals’ factual findings upheld.
Land law – village land allocation – proof of allocation and possession – weight of evidence and balance of probabilities – appellate review of factual findings – trespass following criminal allegations.
|
25 April 2008 |
|
Extension of time granted after court found cashier’s receipt error excused any apparent delay.
Extension of time – filing appeals – cashier’s clerical error in receipt – excusing apparent delay – respondent leaving decision to court – no order as to costs.
|
23 April 2008 |
|
Extension of time granted to file appeal due to district court cashier's administrative error; no costs.
Civil procedure – Extension of time – Administrative error by district court cashier – Delay not attributable to applicant – Application for extension granted – No order as to costs.
|
23 April 2008 |
|
An ex parte trial upheld defamatory publications and awarded general and punitive damages, interest and costs to the plaintiff.
* Civil procedure – Ex parte proceedings – Order IX Rule 6(1)(a)(i) – proceeding where service proved and defendants default. * Defamation – publications to third parties (letters to judiciary, Bar and Minister) – proof by plaintiff and uncontested evidence. * Damages – general and exemplary/punitive damages for malicious defamatory publications; interest and costs awarded.
|
10 April 2008 |
|
|
2 April 2008 |
| March 2008 |
|
|
Convictions quashed where unreliable, contradictory eyewitness identification and improper burden assessment rendered prosecution case unsafe.
Criminal law – armed robbery – identification evidence – material contradictions in eyewitness accounts – unsafe conviction; burden of proof – trial court shifting burden to accused; consolidation of appeals arising from same transaction; return of seized property.
|
25 March 2008 |
| February 2008 |
|
|
A subsequent trespass claim based on acts after an earlier suit’s dismissal is not barred by res judicata.
Res judicata; continuing wrong; trespass as continuing tort; Law of Limitation Act s.7 (fresh period for continuing wrong) relates to limitation, not determinatively to res judicata; cause of action must be the same for res judicata to apply.
|
28 February 2008 |
|
Costs order set aside; where proceedings are nullified after being instituted in wrong forum, parties should bear their own costs.
Civil procedure — Costs — s.30(1) Civil Procedure Code: court has discretion to award costs even where it lacked jurisdiction; but exercising that discretion to order a defendant (who was sued in the wrong forum and compelled to appeal) to pay costs was improper where trial proceedings were declared a nullity. Jurisdiction — land matters to be brought in competent Land Court; appellate relief — setting aside costs and ordering parties to bear their own costs.
|
15 February 2008 |
|
The appeal failed: the house was matrimonial property, the purported 'will' was an assignment, and the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Family law — matrimonial property — division of assets; Appellate procedure — allegation of being condemned unheard / failure to consider written submissions; Characterisation of transaction — will versus inter vivos gift/assignment; Credibility and assessment of conflicting witness evidence; Application of Law of Marriage Act provisions on division of matrimonial assets.
|
15 February 2008 |
|
Uncommunicated reasons for 'retirement in public interest' make it unlawful, but remedies were refused and claim dismissed.
Constitutional and administrative law – Presidential power to retire civil servants in the public interest; requirement to communicate reasons as a matter of natural justice; remedy limitation where notice and benefits were paid; refusal of declaratory relief on public policy grounds; defamation requires evidence of publicity and reputational harm.
|
14 February 2008 |
|
President can retire civil servants in public interest but must give reasons; absence of reasons renders retirement unlawful though reinstatement may be denied.
* Constitutional/Administrative law – presidential power to retire civil servants in public interest (Article 36(2)); * Natural justice – duty to give reasons when retirement affects individual rights; * Labour/Employment – restructuring and redundancy via creation of statutory authority; * Remedies – court may find retirement unlawful but decline reinstatement where notice and terminal benefits were given; * Defamation – requirement of evidence of publicity and reputational harm.
|
14 February 2008 |
|
Appeal allowed: plaintiff failed to prove breach of contract; counter-claim dismissed as time-barred.
Contract law – breach of contract for motor-vehicle repair; evaluation of witness credibility and evidential sufficiency; burden of proof on balance of probabilities; statute-barred counter-claim (six-year limitation).
|
14 February 2008 |
|
Application for certiorari struck out as premature for failure to pursue statutory appeal under saved G.N. No. 397/2000.
Judicial review – certiorari – requirement to exhaust alternative remedies – subsidiary legislation (G.N. No. 397/2000) saved by repealing statute (Public Service Act No. 8/2002 s.36(1)(a)) – affidavit objections (legal argument vs material propositions).
|
14 February 2008 |
|
Remit to primary court to determine marital status, contribution and join any purchaser before final orders.
Property dispute arising from alleged matrimonial property — need to determine marital status and spouse’s contribution to acquisition; failure to join alleged purchaser of disputed property is fatal; remittal for retrial with directions to join purchaser and determine division of proceeds or order sale.
|
7 February 2008 |
| January 2008 |
|
|
The appellant's challenge to division of a house failed; the house was held matrimonial property and division was upheld.
* Family law – division of matrimonial property – whether a house acquired during marriage is matrimonial property subject to division under s.114 Law of Marriage Act.
* Civil procedure – right to be heard – whether failure to analyse written submissions rendered district court judgment a nullity.
* Succession/Property – distinction between a will and an instrument of assignment/gift; relevance of 'will speaks at death' rule.
|
28 January 2008 |
|
Whether the plaintiff proved breach of a vehicle repair contract and whether the counterclaim was time-barred.
Contract – Motor vehicle repairs – Breach of contract for panel-beating and repainting – Proof on balance of probabilities – Credibility and absence of documentary proof. Limitation – Counterclaim for storage charges – Six-year limitation period – Time-barred.
|
23 January 2008 |
|
Child’s untested extra‑judicial statement and unproved confessions rendered cattle‑theft convictions unsafe.
Evidence — Admissibility of extra‑judicial statements by children; Section 127 competency requirement; Section 34B statements; Confessions against co‑accused — proof under Section 33; Identification of cattle — need for distinctive marks; Unsafe convictions.
|
16 January 2008 |