|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| March 2014 |
|
|
No binding contract existed between plaintiff and defendants; plaintiff was supplier’s agent and claim dismissed with costs.
Contract formation — letters of intent and MOU — invitation to treat vs binding offer; essential terms and materiality; agency and privity of contract — consultant/agent for supplier not government; burden to prove breach and causation for damages.
|
31 March 2014 |
|
Failure to cite the specific enabling subrule rendered the revision application incompetent and it was struck out.
Labour law – Revision – Requirement to cite specific enabling provision – Non‑citation or wrong citation of Rule 28(1) (Labour Court Rules) renders application incompetent – Procedural rules mandatory where they go to root of matter.
|
28 March 2014 |
|
|
28 March 2014 |
|
|
28 March 2014 |
|
Application struck out for failure to join the Attorney General as required by Section 10 of the Government Proceedings Act.
Government Proceedings Act s.10 – mandatory joinder of Attorney General in civil proceedings by or against Government; Applications for extension of time/admission of appeals treated as civil proceedings; Practice in land-title appeals does not override statutory requirement.
|
27 March 2014 |
|
An application challenging a government officer’s decision must include the Attorney General; omission renders it incompetent.
Government Proceedings Act s.10 – requirement to institute civil proceedings by or against the Attorney General – scope includes suits, applications, appeals and revisions; non-joinder of Attorney General in proceedings against Registrar of Titles renders application incompetent.
|
27 March 2014 |
|
The applicant’s failure to join the Attorney General in proceedings against a government officer rendered the application incompetent and it was struck out.
Government Proceedings Act s.10 – mandatory joinder of the Attorney General in civil proceedings by or against the Government – includes applications and appeals against decisions of government officers (Registrar of Titles). Administrative law – challenges to decisions of the Registrar of Titles are proceedings against the Government requiring proper party joinder. Civil procedure – failure to join statutorily required party is fatal and warrants striking out the application.
|
27 March 2014 |
|
Applicant’s failure to specify s.79 ground rendered the revision application incompetent and it was struck out with costs.
Civil procedure – Revision – High Court’s revisional jurisdiction under s.79 Cap.33 – Requirement to specify which s.79(1) ground is relied upon. Inherent powers – s.95 Cap.33 – available only where no specific statutory remedy exists. Non‑citation of enabling provision is a jurisdictional defect warranting striking out the application.
|
26 March 2014 |
|
Application struck out for failure to specify the enabling subsection of s.79 Cap.33; s.95 not available to cure the defect.
Civil procedure – Revision under s.79 Civil Procedure Code (Cap.33) – Applicant must specify which subsection of s.79 relied upon; failure is fatal. Inherent powers s.95 – not available where specific statutory remedy exists. Jurisdictional defects – point may be raised at any stage and justify striking out.
|
26 March 2014 |
|
Internal election and membership disputes in a voluntary society are private matters not subject to judicial review.
Administrative law – Judicial review – Availability of prerogative orders (certiorari and prohibition) against private voluntary associations. Public vs private function – Whether internal elections and membership decisions of a statutory voluntary society have public-law character. Natural justice – Alleged breach of procedural fairness in internal governance – remedy lies in private law where function is private. Stare decisis – Persuasive earlier decisions of the same court on similar issues relevant to departure.
|
26 March 2014 |
|
Prerogative public law remedies unavailable for internal election and membership disputes of the Tanzania Red Cross Society.
Judicial review – Availability of prerogative orders (certiorari, prohibition) against internal decisions of statutory non‑governmental bodies; Public v private function – whether internal elections and membership decisions of a society constituted under statute have public law consequences; Stare decisis – persuasive value of prior High Court authority on the Tanzania Red Cross Society’s status; Remedy – appropriateness of private law proceedings for internal disputes.
|
26 March 2014 |
|
Court granted departure from expired scheduling order and allowed a bona fide amendment of the amended plaint, refixing the case on a new speed track.
Civil procedure — Scheduling orders and speed tracks — Departure from expired scheduling order and refixing on new speed track; Amendment of pleadings — Order VI r.17; amendments to determine real questions in controversy; bona fide amendment; negligence in procuring documents does not automatically bar amendment.
|
18 March 2014 |
|
Pecuniary jurisdiction not ousted by a pleaded sum for general damages; post-takeover joinder by amendment allowed.
Civil procedure – Preliminary objection – Pecuniary jurisdiction – Quantum of general damages does not determine jurisdiction; substantive claim governs. Civil procedure – Amendment of pleadings – Order VI r.17 – Joinder of successor defendant who inherits rights and liabilities permitted. Tort – claims for false imprisonment, defamation and malicious prosecution relevant to jurisdictional assessment.
|
14 March 2014 |
|
Court refused prosecution adjournment and discharged the accused due to inordinate delay and unfair‑trial concerns.
Criminal procedure — Adjournment applications by the prosecution — Delay and right to a fair and speedy trial — Powers of trial court to refuse adjournment and to dismiss and discharge accused — Distinction between discharge and acquittal; DPP’s power to re‑charge.
|
13 March 2014 |
|
Failure to prove medical negligence defeats wrongful-death claim and precludes vicarious liability of the employer.
Medical negligence — alleged failure to attend pregnant patient; proof of negligence and causation; admissibility and weight of witness evidence; vicarious liability of municipal employer; administrative investigations exonerating staff.
|
10 March 2014 |
|
Application for out-of-time review dismissed; court found counsel conceded functus officio and no error on the record.
Civil procedure – review – application for leave to file review out of time – requirement of showing error on face of the record. Civil procedure – preliminary objection – defective affidavit and functus officio – effect of in-court concession by counsel. Advocacy – duty to state clearly which objections are conceded – counsel’s failure attributable to counsel, not court. Review grounds – concession as not constituting an error on the face of the record.
|
10 March 2014 |
|
The court granted the applicant an extension to file a review application despite unexplained delay, citing the interests of justice.
Civil procedure – enlargement of time – application for review – unexplained delay – discretion exercised in interests of justice – weight of large disputed sum; absence of signed agreement to prove payments.
|
7 March 2014 |
|
Enlargement of time granted to file review despite unexplained delay because the matter involves a substantial sum.
Extension of time – Application for enlargement to file review – Delay unexplained despite garnishee order – Ex parte hearing and absence of counsel – Interest of justice and substantial sum justify granting extension – Costs each party to bear.
|
7 March 2014 |
|
Court granted limited extension to file review despite inadequate reasons, citing interest of justice and large monetary stakes.
Civil procedure — enlargement of time to file application for review — delay and explanation — ex parte proceedings and awareness via garnishee order — recognition of payments absent signed agreement — exercise of discretion in the interests of justice.
|
7 March 2014 |
|
Court granted extension to file review despite unexplained delay, exercising discretion in the interest of justice given the large sum involved.
Civil procedure – extension/enlargement of time – application for review – requirement to show good cause – court’s discretion to grant extension in the interest of justice where substantial sums are at stake and despite unexplained delay. Civil procedure – ex parte hearing and subsequent garnishee order as notice of judgment – delay in taking steps after awareness.
|
7 March 2014 |
|
The appellants' convictions were quashed because night‑time identification by candle/torchlight was unreliable.
Criminal law – Visual identification – Night‑time identification by candle or torch light – necessity to consider duration, distance, light intensity, and prior acquaintance. Evidence – Standard of proof – case must be proved beyond reasonable doubt; every reasonable possibility of mistaken identity must be excluded. Criminal procedure – Unsafe identification leads to quashing of conviction and setting aside of sentence.
|
5 March 2014 |
|
Appellants' convictions quashed because visual identification by candle/torchlight was unsafe and unreliable.
Criminal law – visual identification – identification at night by candle or torch light – necessity to state duration, distance, intensity of light and prior acquaintance; Standard of proof – prosecution must exclude reasonable possibility of mistaken identity; Family-member witnesses – competence acknowledged but not determinative where identification is unsafe; Conviction unsafe where visual identification in poor light is unsupported by particulars.
|
5 March 2014 |
|
Conviction quashed due to defective charge and procedural irregularities in admission of medical and other evidence.
Criminal law – Rape – Charge must disclose essential elements; paragraph of s.130(2) must be specified. Criminal procedure – Section 240(3) CP A – PF.3 (medical report) tendered: accused must be informed of right to summon author. Evidence – Cautioned statement requires formal admission as exhibit before being acted upon. Judgment requirements – Section 312(1) CPA: points for determination and reasons mandatory; failure may render conviction unsafe.
|
4 March 2014 |