|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2012 |
|
|
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed where prosecution failed to rebut birth certificate and maternal evidence of Tanzanian citizenship.
Citizenship law – dual citizenship and cessation (s.7(1) Citizenship Act); Burden of proof – general criminal burden vs. s.30 Immigration Act; Evidence – birth certificate and parental testimony as proof of citizenship; False statement offence – maker, mens rea and causal effect on immigration action (see Bihigomondo).
|
12 December 2012 |
|
Convictions quashed where prosecution failed to disprove appellant's Tanzanian citizenship and failed to prove the passport offence.
* Immigration/Citizenship law – proof of citizenship – section 7(1) Citizenship Act – cessation of citizenship requires proven dual citizenship.
* Immigration law – burden of proof – section 30 Immigration Act places burden of proving Tanzanian citizenship on claimant, who may discharge it by birth certificate and credible testimony.
* Criminal law – false statement to obtain passport – requirement that accused made the statement and possessed requisite knowledge that officer would act detrimentally (per John Straton Bihigomondo v R).
* Evidence – academic records and schooling abroad insufficient to prove foreign citizenship where birth certificate and sworn maternal evidence exist.
|
12 December 2012 |
|
Application for review filed within 30 days; appeal dismissed for want of prosecution should be challenged by re-admission, not review.
- Civil Procedure – Review — applicability of Order XLII (form of review) and requirement to annex copy of judgment/ruling; limitation period (30 days) applies to review applications; time runs from receipt of copy and time spent obtaining copy is excluded (s.19(1), Cap 89).
- Civil Procedure – Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution under Order XXXIX Rule 17(1) — proper remedy generally is application for re-admission under Order XXXIX Rule 19, not review.
- Review grounds — limited to error on face of record, fraud, denial of hearing, or newly discovered evidence; erroneous obiter dicta or points proper for appeal are not grounds for review.
|
11 December 2012 |
|
Concubinage does not create matrimonial property; absent proven contribution, registered owner’s sale valid and tribunal had jurisdiction.
Land law — jurisdiction of Land and Housing Tribunal — distinction between matrimonial property and property arising from concubinage; proof of joint ownership requires evidence of contribution; registered owner’s sale passes good title.
|
11 December 2012 |
|
A pending probate administration does not automatically stay a separate land suit unless it involves the identical subject matter.
* Civil procedure – Stay of proceedings – Sub judice doctrine – Stay appropriate only where another pending arbitration or suit between same parties involves identical subject matter. * Land law – Proper forum – Distinction between probate proceedings concerning estate administration and separate land disputes. * Probate – Pending probate causes do not automatically stay unrelated civil actions.
|
10 December 2012 |
|
Court held claim not time‑barred: right of action accrues when interference with possession began; plaint determines cause of action.
Limitation of actions – right of action accrues when cause of action arises (s.5 Law of Limitation Act) – cause of action determined from the plaint – preliminary objection on limitation overruled where suit filed within prescribed period after interference with possession.
|
10 December 2012 |
|
Marriage irreparably broken; joint matrimonial assets divided, former separate home declared matrimonial and awarded to applicant to redress economic disadvantage.
Divorce—irretrievable breakdown—constructive desertion and separation over three years under section 107(2) LMA; Matrimonial property—definition and characterization where registration is in one spouse’s name; Substantial improvements by the other spouse can render separate property matrimonial under section 114(3) LMA; Division of matrimonial assets—equal division where contributions are unascertainable; Compensation for lost economic opportunities on divorce.
|
7 December 2012 |
|
Applicant’s later tenancy claim barred by res judicata; earlier tribunal had finally adjudicated lease-related rights.
* Civil procedure – res judicata – section 9 CPC – later suit barred where matter was directly and substantially in issue and finally decided in earlier proceeding between same parties.
* Land law / Tenancy – lease terms and expiry – renewal not automatic; prior tribunal order on lease and recovery of development costs determines subsequent claims.
* Remedies – declaratory relief and damages – cannot be used to relitigate issues already adjudicated; advertisement before lease expiry did not create new cause of action.
|
6 December 2012 |
|
An appeal filed within 60 days from certification of judgment and decree is not time-barred; objection overruled.
Limitation of actions – computation of appeal period – exclusion of time spent obtaining certified copies under s.19 Law of Limitation Act; Appeals – requirement of certified judgment and decree before filing appeal; Procedural objection – time-barred appeal – objection overruled where petition filed within 60 days from certification.
|
4 December 2012 |
|
A company director lacks capacity to sue personally for wrongs to the company; suit struck out and costs awarded.
* Company law – separate legal personality – Salomon v Salomon – a company is a distinct legal person; directors/members cannot sue in personal capacity for company rights. * Locus standi – capacity to sue – director lacks standing to enforce company's rights. * Cause of action – essentials (right, violation, liability) per Auto Garage v Motokov – existence of cause of action can be established even if prospect of success is uncertain.
|
3 December 2012 |
| November 2012 |
|
|
Affidavit relying on unnamed third‑party information is hearsay, incurably defective and cannot support injunctive relief.
* Civil procedure – supporting affidavit – facts must be within deponent’s knowledge – where facts based on information from another, that person should depose (Order XIX Rule 3 C.P.C.).
* Evidence – hearsay in affidavits – unauthorised third‑party information in an affidavit is inadmissible and lacks evidential value.
* Procedural remedy – incurable affidavit defects – preliminary objection upheld and application dismissed with costs.
|
30 November 2012 |
|
The High Court quashed the RM's proceedings for failing to enforce the Minister's labour decision and for improperly treating compensation as validating termination.
Labour law – Enforcement of Minister for Labour's decision – Duty of magistrate to execute, not review, confirmed awards; Compensation under s.42(5) – statutory right does not validate unlawful termination or bar arrears claims; Execution procedure – assessment of damages and ordering accounting improper in execution context.
|
30 November 2012 |
|
A sale of matrimonial land by one spouse without the other’s consent is voidable and here was declared null and unenforceable.
Land law – Matrimonial property – Disposition by one spouse – Assignee’s duty to inquire under Land Act ss.161(2),(3) and Law of Marriage Act s.59 – Sale without other spouse’s consent voidable/null.
|
29 November 2012 |
|
A sale of matrimonial land without the non‑owning spouse’s consent is voidable and unenforceable; purchaser must inquire under statute.
* Land law – disposition of land by one spouse – duty of assignee/transferee to inquire as to spousal consent (Land Act s.161(2)–(3)).
* Matrimonial property – spouse’s consent required for transfer/assignment even if title/licence is in one spouse’s name (Law of Marriage Act s.59).
* Disposition without required spousal consent is voidable/unenforceable at option of non-consenting spouse.
* Procedural: trial tribunal erred by upholding sale absent evidence of consent or statutory inquiry.
|
29 November 2012 |
|
Registered Right of Occupancy proved respondent's ownership; appellant failed to prove title, appeal dismissed and eviction ordered.
* Land law — Ownership — Right of Occupancy and registered title as primary proof of ownership.
* Evidence — Evaluation by trial and appellate tribunals; necessity of documentary proof for transfer or assignment of land.
* Limitation — Action timely where suit filed promptly after refusal to vacate.
* Relief — Appeal dismissed; eviction ordered; costs awarded.
|
29 November 2012 |
|
A land court may hear disputes over sale of land even if related estate-administration issues arise; purchaser can be sued.
Land law — jurisdiction under Section 167 of the Land Act — challenge to disposition of land; Estate administration — ancillary issues do not oust land court jurisdiction; Joinder — purchaser as proper defendant and cause of action established; Preliminary objections — jurisdiction and causa action overruled.
|
29 November 2012 |
|
Applicant's failure to appeal remittal and default at retrial bars later challenge; appeal dismissed with costs.
* Land procedure – Revision v. Appeal – litigant who fails to appeal a remittal order and elects revision cannot later challenge de novo proceedings.
* Civil procedure – Failure to appear – ex parte ward tribunal proceedings where party was duly summoned and abstained are not automatically void.
* Finality of litigation – public interest in ending repetitive relitigation prevents re-opening of matters absent proper appellate challenge.
* Jurisdiction/Remittal – effect of district tribunal ordering a de novo trial at ward tribunal.
|
28 November 2012 |
|
Application to lift a garnishee order dismissed but court corrected the decretal sum, applying simple interest and awarding costs.
Garnishee proceedings — lifting garnishee order nisi; Civil Procedure Code s38(1) and s95; calculation of decretal sum — simple v. compound interest; locus in garnishee proceedings; shareholder liability.
|
28 November 2012 |
|
General damages do not determine pecuniary jurisdiction; a plaint need only disclose facts establishing jurisdiction.
Civil procedure — Jurisdiction; pecuniary jurisdiction determined by substantive claim not general damages — Pleadings — plaint must disclose facts showing jurisdiction (O. VII r.1(f)) and state value for court-fees (r.1(i)) — Defamation — valuation of subject matter; general damages assessed by court.
|
28 November 2012 |
|
Court struck out and expunged an inactive suit after repeated non-appearances, awarding costs while not intending outright dismissal.
Land procedure – preliminary objections (no cause of action, time bar, amended plaint) – party non-appearance – court’s power to strike out/expunge inactive suits – costs.
|
27 November 2012 |
|
Failure to join the occupier/trespasser in a land suit requires dismissal and upholds the appellate decision.
* Land law – Non-joinder of necessary parties – occupier/trespasser must be joined before declaration of ownership; * Proper parties – hamlet chairman not proper defendant where he is not owner/occupier; * Civil procedure – failure to join necessary party justifies setting aside judgment.
|
27 November 2012 |
|
Plaintiff's main case must be heard before ex parte counterclaim proof; post-suit Certificate of Title not admissible without leave.
Civil procedure — order of hearing — main claim heard before ex parte proof of counterclaim; Admissibility of documents — Certificate of Title obtained after institution of suit and not attached to plaint cannot be entered into court record without leave; Committal — oral committal application not granted.
|
27 November 2012 |
|
High Court has jurisdiction over tort claim from a faulty meter, but suit struck out for not being filed in the lowest competent court.
Jurisdiction – Distinction between electricity supply disputes (EWURA) and tort claims for damages; Section 13 Civil Procedure Code – requirement to institute suit in lowest competent court; claim amount threshold (TShs.150,000,000/=) determining forum.
|
27 November 2012 |
|
Long occupation and a residential licence do not establish ownership; Ward Tribunal constitution and jurisdiction upheld.
* Courts (Land Disputes Settlement) Act, s.11 – composition of Ward Tribunal – interpretation of requirement for three women.* Pecuniary jurisdiction – Ward Tribunal limit (Tzs.3,000,000/=) – jurisdiction depends on pleaded value.* Adverse possession/limitation – long occupation insufficient without proof of hostile, exclusive possession and supporting evidence.* Residential licence – does not confer title to land.* Locus in quo – site visits are discretionary, not mandatory, and required only when necessary to resolve factual disputes.
|
26 November 2012 |
|
Trial court lacked jurisdiction and condemned the appellant unheard; proceedings nullified and case to be refiled.
Employment law – jurisdiction of courts – s.142(1) Employment Act – District Magistrate’s jurisdiction; Administrative law – natural justice – audi alteram partem – condemnation unheard; Trial proceedings held null for lack of jurisdiction and breach of fair hearing.
|
22 November 2012 |
|
Power of Attorney cannot be used to institute High Court proceedings where the principal is resident; plaint struck out for defective verification and unstamped power.
* Civil procedure – Representation by power of attorney – Power of Attorney not a substitute for personal appearance where principal is resident in Tanzania – authority: Naiman Moiro v Nailjiet K.J. Zablon [1980] TLR 274; George Celestine (1998) TLR 512. * Pleadings – Verification of plaint – non-compliance with Order VI Rules 14 and 15 CPC grounds for rejection. * Formalities – Notarial stamping of Power of Attorney required for validity in court proceedings.
|
22 November 2012 |
|
Application for injunction dismissed for being improperly moved, lacking a pending suit between parties, and for defective affidavit.
* Civil procedure – interlocutory injunction – requirement of pending suit between parties (O.XXXVII r.1 CPC). * Civil procedure – competence of application – court properly moved and correct statutory basis required. * Evidence – affidavits must not contain presumptions or personal opinions (O.XIX r.3 CPC). * Procedural irregularity – amended chamber application filed without leave.
|
22 November 2012 |
|
Injunction application dismissed for being improperly moved, lacking a pending suit and supported by a defective affidavit.
Land law - interim injunction against transfer of title; procedural requirement of pending inter partes suit (Order XXXVII r.1 CPC); proper statutory basis to move the court; admissibility of affidavit material (Order XIX r.3 CPC) - presumption and opinion.
|
22 November 2012 |
|
Appeal dismissed: tribunal’s factual finding that respondent (heir) owns the land and attached mango trees upheld.
* Land law – ownership of land and fixtures – trees as part of the land sold. * Civil procedure – locus standi – competency to sue; absence and failure to comply with directions as non-appearance and abuse of process. * Appellate review – deference to trial tribunal's factual findings where supported by evidence.
|
22 November 2012 |
|
A typographical year error does not defeat a valid revision; preliminary objections were overruled.
Land law — Revision of tribunal proceedings — Typographical error in cited case year not fatal — Preliminary objections to competence of revision for interlocutory orders must be assessed against tribunal record.
|
22 November 2012 |
|
A private prosecution based on statements in pending civil proceedings must be stayed until the civil case is decided.
Criminal procedure – Private prosecution – Leave to prosecute can be granted ex parte; court examines affidavit at face value. Jurisdiction – District Court competent to hear prosecution arising from related civil proceedings. Stay – Criminal proceedings alleging perjury arising from ongoing civil proceedings should be stayed pending resolution of the civil matter to avoid conflicting findings.
|
21 November 2012 |
|
High Court lacked jurisdiction to grant stay after Notices of Appeal filed in the Court of Appeal; application dismissed.
Civil procedure — Stay of execution — Jurisdiction — Filing of Notice of Appeal in Court of Appeal ousts High Court jurisdiction; leave to appeal required — procedure after refusal — affidavit must show irreparable harm and prospects of success.
|
21 November 2012 |
|
High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant a stay once a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeal has been filed.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution pending appeal – Jurisdiction of High Court after filing Notice of Appeal in Court of Appeal – once Notice filed High Court ceases to have jurisdiction.
* Appeals – Leave to appeal – where leave required applicant must seek leave from High Court first; if refused may apply to Court of Appeal for leave, not appeal the refusal.
* Requirements for stay – affidavit must show sufficient reasons and irreparable harm but substantive consideration precluded by jurisdictional bar.
* Constitutional discretion – Article 107A(2)(e) cannot be used to override lack of jurisdiction.
|
21 November 2012 |
|
Appellate court dismisses applicant’s trespass claim where ownership evidence was hearsay and lower tribunals’ findings stood.
Land law – trespass – evidentiary burden in land ownership disputes – hearsay evidence insufficient to establish title; appellate deference to trial tribunal’s locus in quo findings and credibility assessments.
|
21 November 2012 |
|
An assertion of appeal success and reputational harm from civil imprisonment do not justify a stay of execution.
Civil procedure — Stay of execution — Order XXXIX r.5 CPC — Applicant must show sufficient cause and substantial loss — Mere assertion of appeal's success insufficient — Detention as civil prisoner and reputational loss are ordinary, not substantial, consequences.
|
20 November 2012 |
|
An assertion of likely success on appeal and reputational harm from civil imprisonment do not justify stay of execution without showing substantial loss.
* Civil procedure – Stay of execution – Order XXXIX, rule 5 CPC – Requirement to show sufficient cause and risk of substantial loss before granting stay pending appeal.
* Appeal prospects – Mere assertion of 'overwhelming chances' is insufficient to obtain stay of execution.
* Civil imprisonment – Detention and reputational harm from failure to satisfy a decree constitute ordinary loss, not 'substantial loss.'
|
20 November 2012 |
|
Amendment introducing new facts permitted fresh injunction application; court granted temporary injunction pending suit.
Interlocutory injunctions; amendment of plaint; functus officio; review under Section 78 CPA; prima facie case; balance of convenience; alleged unauthorized payment to third party; breach of loan agreement.
|
19 November 2012 |
|
A case should not be struck out solely for exceeding its speed-track timetable; scheduling manages pace, not access to court.
Civil procedure — Scheduling/pre-trial conference — Speed Track allocation (Order VIII A, Cap.33 R.E.2002) — Exceeding prescribed Speed Track period — Whether strike-out warranted — Case management vs. jurisdictional bar.
|
7 November 2012 |
|
Plaint dismissed for failing to plead a cause of action against the defendant; plaint struck out under Order VII r.11(a).
* Civil procedure – plaint must disclose cause of action – essentials: plaintiff’s right, violation, and defendant’s liability (Auto Garage v Motokov). * Order VII r.11(a) CPC – strike out for non‑disclosure of cause of action. * Suit against owner/trustees – need to plead legal relationship or facts establishing defendant’s liability.
|
7 November 2012 |
|
A mortgage-based commercial dispute is not a land dispute; the Land Division lacks jurisdiction and the suit was struck out with costs.
Jurisdiction – Land Division – Mortgage disputes – Whether mortgaging land or enforcement attempts convert a commercial/contractual claim into a land dispute – Held: mere security by land does not confer Land Division jurisdiction.
|
6 November 2012 |
| October 2012 |
|
|
Convictions quashed where PF3 was improperly admitted, the trial court failed to evaluate evidence and omitted required reasons.
* Criminal law – rape – sufficiency of evidence and evaluation of prosecution and defence testimony; admissibility of medical report (PF3) and right to cross-examine medical officer (s.240 CPA). * Evidence – s.127(7) Evidence Act does not confer automatic credibility on complainant where other evidence raises doubt. * Criminal procedure – requirement for clear, reasoned judgment (s.312(1) CPA) and consequences of illegible/insufficient record. * Charging/conviction integrity – conviction must correspond to properly tried charge; convictions unsafe where procedural and evidential safeguards breached.
|
31 October 2012 |
|
A trial court unlawfully dismissed a civil claim without hearing parties; defect in plaint held curable and matter remitted for rehearing.
Civil procedure – dismissal without hearing – natural justice violated where parties not heard; Civil v Criminal proceedings – concurrent criminal matters do not bar civil suit; Pleadings – Order VII r1 CPC defect curable; Record keeping – importance of complete "coram" entries; Execution order inconsistent with judgment set aside.
|
30 October 2012 |
|
Failure to take pleas before trial renders the entire criminal trial null and convictions must be quashed.
Criminal procedure – Failure to take plea – Section 228(1) Criminal Procedure Act – Omission renders trial a nullity – Not curable under section 388 – Conviction quashed; no retrial ordered.
|
29 October 2012 |
|
Failure to take accused's plea renders the criminal trial void; convictions and sentences quashed.
Criminal procedure – Plea-taking – Mandatory requirement to state substance of charge and call for plea (s.228(1) CPA) – Failure to take plea renders trial a nullity – defect not cured by curative provision – retrial discretionary.
|
29 October 2012 |
|
An ex parte judgment entered against the applicant for lack of notice was set aside; appeal reheard and execution nullified.
Civil procedure – setting aside ex parte judgment for want of notice; rehearing inter partes; nullification of execution proceedings; return of property attached in execution; duty of court/registry to communicate hearing dates.
|
22 October 2012 |
|
Extension of time granted where applicant bona fide prosecuted appeal in wrong forum under section 21 of the Law of Limitation Act.
Civil procedure – extension of time – limitation – section 21 Law of Limitation Act – bona fide prosecution in wrong forum as sufficient cause for extension; appeals; remittal of substantive irregularity claims to trial court.
|
22 October 2012 |
|
Extension of time granted where applicant bona fide prosecuted appeal in wrong forum under section 21 Limitation Act.
Limitation of actions – Extension of time – Section 21 Law of Limitation Act – bona fide prosecution in wrong forum as sufficient cause; Civil procedure – Jurisdictional error – Wrong forum filings; Appeal procedure – Substantive irregularities to be determined on merits by competent court, not at extension stage.
|
22 October 2012 |
|
A district court must identify legal errors and properly quash, vary or confirm primary court orders when exercising revisional power, or its ruling is null.
Revisional jurisdiction – Magistrates Courts Act ss.21 & 22 – revisional orders must identify errors on face of record and invoke statutory remedies; purposeless revision is a nullity – requirements for quashing, varying or rehearing primary court decisions.
|
19 October 2012 |
|
District Court lacked jurisdiction to hear refiled employment claim filed after transitional period; limitation exception preserved the claim.
Labour law – applicability of transitional/savings provisions after repeal – correct commencement date of Act – jurisdiction of district court; Limitation law – section 21 exclusion for genuine pursuit of prior proceedings in courts lacking jurisdiction; Refiling vs continuation of proceedings; Commission for Mediation and Arbitration jurisdiction shift.
|
17 October 2012 |
|
District Court lacked jurisdiction where labour claim was filed under a repealed Act after transitional period; prior proceedings excluded limitation.
* Labour law – repeal and commencement – Employment and Labour Relations Act – transitional/savings provisions (Third Schedule, item 13) – three‑year cut‑off.
* Jurisdiction – improper institution of new employment proceedings under a repealed Act – effect of Court of Appeal’s direction to pursue remedies under new labour regime.
* Limitation – application of section 21 Law of Limitation Act to exclude time spent pursuing prior proceedings in courts unable to entertain the matter.
* Relief – revision: quashing and setting aside of District Court proceedings; no costs order in labour matter.
|
17 October 2012 |