|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2015 |
|
|
Appellate court increased general damages, recognized proven special damages, rejected spousal constant-care claim; each party bears own costs.
• Motor-vehicle collisions – burden of proof on contributory negligence; lack of defendant evidence precludes finding plaintiff’s negligence.
• Damages – assessment of general damages for permanent partial incapacity; appellate variation of inadequate awards.
• Special damages – strict proof by receipts; failure to award proven special damages is error.
• Pecuniary claims for spousal ‘constant care’ – generally not a separate head of recoverable damages.
• Interest – propriety of awarding interest from date of judgment at court rate.
|
31 December 2015 |
|
Appeal dismissed: absence and late appearance prevented reopening of case and tribunal’s evaluation of evidence was upheld.
* Land law – ownership dispute – evaluation of evidence by Tribunal – application of balance of probabilities; * Civil procedure – effect of party’s absence and late appearance – striking out of objection and refusal to admit late evidence; * Appellate review – when appellate court will not disturb factual findings of trial tribunal.
|
30 December 2015 |
|
The applicant must sue the employer/branch, not individual respondents, for property seized during eviction for unpaid rent.
Civil procedure – preliminary objection – wrong party sued – whether suit against individual agents instead of employer/branch is maintainable; Agency/vicarious liability – actions of agents in eviction and seizure – employer/branch responsibility; Capacity to be sued – non-corporate branch liable for acts concerning its premises; Pleadings – requirement to sue the proper party before trial.
|
29 December 2015 |
|
Appeal dismissed: wrong parties sued—branch (employer/agent) is the proper defendant despite lacking corporate registration.
Civil procedure – Parties – Proper party to sue; agency/employment – acts of agents in eviction and seizure; capacity to sue – non‑registered branch held responsible; preliminary objection – point of law vs factual issue.
|
29 December 2015 |
|
Review of strike-out dismissed where applicant’s settlement undertaking and prolonged non-prosecution justified striking out.
Civil procedure – review of interlocutory/order – strike-out of suit for failure to prosecute and parties’ undertaking to settle; review limited to errors apparent on face of record; court will not revise its own order as if on appeal; effect of expired speed-track and failure to extend.
|
29 December 2015 |
|
Failure to read and explain an amended charge and to record plea is a fatal procedural irregularity, quashing the conviction.
* Criminal procedure – Amendment/substitution of charges – duty to state substance of charge and record plea (Section 228 CPA) – failure fatal. * Criminal procedure – Effect of trying accused on particulars not put to him – conviction quashed. * Evidence – issues on cautioned statement, certificate of seizure and exhibit identification raised but not determined.
|
23 December 2015 |
|
Section 148(4) CPA unconstitutional for denying suspects and accused a fair hearing before bail is refused by DPP certificate.
Constitutional law — fair hearing (Article 13(6)(a)) — bail — section 148(4) Criminal Procedure Act — DPP's certificate — denial of right to be heard — separation of functions — public-interest enforcement — purposive interpretation.
|
22 December 2015 |
|
|
22 December 2015 |
|
An interim market committee retains locus standi to challenge its disbandment despite an expired term; matter remitted for hearing.
Procedural irregularity—failure to state whether suit was dismissed or struck out; Locus standi—expired interim committee retains interest to challenge disbandment; Preliminary objection—merits left for hearing; Revision—remit to another magistrate.
|
22 December 2015 |
|
Illegible trial record precluded adjudication; retrial refused as not in interests of justice, conviction quashed and sentence set aside.
Criminal law – appeal – defective or unintelligible trial record – when retrial should be ordered; discretion to order retrial guided by "interests of justice" (Fatehali Manji principle); considerations include trauma to complainant and time served by accused.
|
21 December 2015 |
|
High Court dismissed appeal: evidence did not prove cruelty or irretrievable marriage breakdown; BAKWATA certificate insufficient alone.
Law of Marriage Act s.107 – irretrievable breakdown – proof required; cruelty – legal definition and threshold; reconciliation board certificate (BAKWATA) not alone conclusive proof of breakdown; appellate review of divorce/nullity decrees.
|
18 December 2015 |
|
Applicant granted extension to file notice of appeal after court found procedural defects did not show lack of diligence.
Civil procedure – extension of time to file Notice of Appeal – previous striking out for procedural defects (unsigned notice; unauthorised/unattested affidavit) – sufficiency of reasons and diligence – discretion to grant extension.
|
18 December 2015 |
|
Appeal dismissed: court upheld damages for amputation and loss of earnings, refusing to apply restitutio in integrum or contributory negligence.
Employment compensation – injury to employee’s finger – restitutio in integrum not applicable to loss of organ; contributory negligence inapplicable where claim is compensation as workman; assessment of general damages discretionary and justified by severity and amputation; pleaded loss of earnings recoverable without stricter proof.
|
18 December 2015 |
|
DRE recommendations made after finding the contract void cannot create enforceable rights to detained goods.
Contract law – void ab initio – effect on dispute resolution: a Dispute Review Expert who finds the host contract void lacks jurisdiction to determine rights arising from that contract; such recommendations exceed jurisdiction and have no legal effect; arbitral/non-arbitral status of DRE recommendations; torts – trespass to goods and detinue – cannot be founded on invalid DRE recommendations; restitution/claims based on enforcement of a void contract; evidentiary requirements for storage charges.
|
16 December 2015 |
|
Failure to file written submissions under Rule 106(1) rendered the appeal non‑maintainable and it was struck out.
* Civil procedure – Court of Appeal – mandatory filing of written submissions under Rule 106(1) – consequences of non‑compliance under Rule 106(9)/(19).
* Procedural law – Preliminary objection for non‑compliance – discretion to extend time – limits to invocation of Rule 2 (substantive justice) to override mandatory rules.
|
16 December 2015 |
|
A bank may recover sums paid on dishonoured uncleared cheques; corporate customer liable, director not personally liable absent evidence.
Banking law – recovery of money paid under mistake; uncleared cheques credited to customer; dishonour and reversal of entries; change-of-position defence; personal liability of company director/signatory.
|
16 December 2015 |
|
Bank may recover funds paid on dishonoured uncleared cheques; company liable, director not personally liable.
Banking law — Crediting of uncleared cheques — Dishonoured/stopped cheques — Recovery for money paid under mistake — Change of position/unjust enrichment defence — Personal liability of company director/signatory.
|
16 December 2015 |
|
High Court competent to hear libel suits; preliminary objection that matter belonged to lower court overruled.
Defamation (libel) — Newspapers Act s56 — High Court, resident magistrate and district courts have concurrent jurisdiction; common-law presumption of general damage in libel; pleadings — plaint determines claim and jurisdiction; preliminary objection on jurisdiction may be raised at any stage.
|
14 December 2015 |
|
Expiry of a fixed-term contract justified termination; CMA’s award confirmed and revision dismissed.
Labour law – Fixed-term employment – Expiry of contract as valid reason for termination – Procedural requirements for non-renewal – CMA’s evaluation of evidence and clarity of awards on terminal benefits.
|
14 December 2015 |
|
|
14 December 2015 |
|
Admissibility of police‑held photocopies under Rule 14 and dismissal of bank’s loan claim for failure to prove disbursement and withdrawals.
* Civil procedure/Labour Court Rules – Rule 14 – pre‑trial disclosure – admissibility of documents and leave to use documents not disclosed; photocopies of police‑held documents.* Evidence/Commercial – bank loan claims – burden of proof on lender to show disbursement and authorised withdrawals; unexplained use of multiple accounts raises reasonable doubt; failure to prove separate foreign‑currency facility.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
Court declares defendant rightful owner, cancels tainted title, awards defendant Tshs.15,000,000 and costs.
Land law – ownership dispute over Plots No.1022–1030 Block A Mbweni – validity of competing sale agreements and signatures – title registration irregularities – cancellation/rectification of Certificate of Title – non-impleaded executor and damages for demolition.
|
11 December 2015 |
|
Administrator General must pursue estate administration, sue obstructionists for title deeds, distribute assets and exhibit account in court.
Probate — Administrator General’s duty to exhibit accounts and distribute estate — obstruction by third party not a lawful excuse — duty to sue to recover title deeds and proceed with distribution — court directive to exhibit account of distribution.
|
10 December 2015 |
|
Court taxed the bill of costs, awarding Tshs 15,451,500 to the decree holder and disallowing the remainder.
Costs — Taxation of bill of costs; Advocate Remuneration Order (GN No. 264/2015) — discretion under Rule 12(1); instruction fees — reduction where matter disposed on preliminary objection; allowance of travel, attendance and disbursement items without receipts — lump sum awards; preliminary objection — effect on quantum of costs.
|
10 December 2015 |
|
Failure to produce adequate proof of inability to attend court defeats an application to set aside dismissal of proceedings.
Civil procedure — Application to set aside dismissal for non-appearance — Applicant must provide adequate evidence of inability to appear (e.g. notice of hearing or certified proceedings) — Bare assertion insufficient — Restoration refused; no order as to costs where respondent absent.
|
10 December 2015 |
|
Child's testimony taken without required voir dire is inadmissible; conviction quashed for lack of proof and procedural irregularity.
* Criminal law – Evidence of child of tender years – Section 127 Evidence Act – requirement for voir dire/affirmation – inadmissibility when absent.
* Criminal procedure – Defective charge – citation of non-existent statutory provision – prejudice and waiver.
* Criminal procedure – Judgment and sentence – one magistrate drafting judgment, another imposing sentence – breach of section 214 CPA; irregularity vitiating proceedings.
* Proof – Medical evidence/PF3 insufficient to establish identity once child’s evidence expunged.
|
7 December 2015 |
|
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Strike held a dispute of right (misconduct); dismissal substantively fair but procedurally unfair; four months' pay awarded.
Labour law – strike – distinction between dispute of right and dispute of interest; unlawful strike as valid substantive reason for dismissal; procedural fairness requires proof of service/notification for disciplinary hearings; remedies for procedurally unfair dismissal when reinstatement is impractical – reduction of compensation.
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Applicant failed to show sufficient cause for extension of time to seek revision; application dismissed with costs.
Law of Limitation Act s.14(1) – extension of time – requirement to show reasonable/sufficient cause – duty to place material for court’s discretion; Revision applications – prescribed period (item 21, Part II) and promptness; Non-party to probate/revocation proceedings – absence does not automatically vitiate proceedings or justify extension of time.
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Under S.114 only assets acquired during marriage by joint efforts are divisible; unproven pre‑marital claims fail.
* Family law – Division of matrimonial assets – S.114(1) Law of Marriage Act – assets acquired during marriage by joint efforts are divisible. * Proof of ownership/disposition of land – importance of documentary evidence for pre-marriage acquisition; oral testimony insufficient where no sale agreement produced. * Proceeds of sale – where assets sold and proceeds consumed during marriage, court will not order division of non-existent assets.
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Report to a community leader initiated malicious prosecution; damages proven but reduced to Tshs 15,000,000.
* Malicious prosecution – elements: initiation of prosecution, lack of reasonable cause, and favourable termination – established where complainant's report set criminal process in motion and prosecution ended for lack of evidence. * Damages – proof of pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss (detention, loss of employment, mental anguish) supports compensation; appellate reduction of excessive award.
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Conviction on a guilty plea set aside where defective, uncertain particulars made the plea not unequivocal; matter remitted for fresh plea.
Criminal law – guilty plea – requirement that plea be unequivocal and admit essential elements of the offence – defective/uncertain particulars (date/time/place) vitiating plea – remedy: quash conviction and remit for fresh plea.
|
4 December 2015 |
|
Court upheld awarding matrimonial house to children under father's care, prioritizing children's needs over sale.
Matrimonial property – division of assets where infant children exist – court's duty under section 114(2) Law of Marriage Act to consider children's needs – awarding house to children and placing it under father's care versus ordering sale and division.
|
3 December 2015 |
|
Application to extend time for filing an appeal dismissed for failure to account for each day of delay.
* Civil procedure – extension of time – applicant must account for every day of delay; partial or general explanations insufficient.
* Limitation Act (s.14) – requirement to show sufficient cause for extension of time.
* Proof of intention to appeal/availability of ruling – relevance but court found explanation inadequate.
* Procedural question of appealability of district court order noted but not decided.
|
1 December 2015 |
| November 2015 |
|
|
Dismissal for non-appearance set aside where parties were not served notice after judge reassignment; case restored.
Civil procedure – Order IX Rule 9(1) CPC – Setting aside dismissal for non-appearance – Lack of service/notice following reassignment of presiding judge – Defaults authored by court administration as 'good cause'.
|
27 November 2015 |
|
Extension of time denied where appellant failed to account for delay and did not prove an installment agreement.
Civil procedure – extension of time to appeal – requirement to account for delay – alleged payment by installments not proven – execution after failure to pay – discretion of appellate court to dismiss application for want of sufficient cause.
|
27 November 2015 |
|
Primary Court had jurisdiction, conducted a proper hearing, and asset division (with valuation/buy‑out option) complied with s.114(2).
Matrimonial law – jurisdiction of Primary Court under s.18(1)(b) Cap 11 and s.76 Cap 29 – division of matrimonial assets – s.114(2) Law of Marriage Act (needs of infant children; equality) – judicial care in matrimonial proceedings – valuation and buy-out option for matrimonial home.
|
27 November 2015 |
|
Court upheld armed robbery convictions based on reliable eyewitness ID and corroborating cautioned statements despite parade deficiencies.
Criminal law – armed robbery – visual identification (Waziri Amani) – unreliable identification parade where PF186 absent – admission and weight of cautioned statements/retracted confessions – doctrine of recent possession – proof of ownership and recovery of stolen property.
|
27 November 2015 |
|
Representative-suit application struck out because applicants failed to produce written, signed authority as required by Order I Rule 12(2).
* Civil procedure – Representative suit – Order I Rules 8 and 12 – written, signed authority required and must be filed in court – photocopied list insufficient. * Temporary injunction – invoked where no suit exists – preliminary objection on citation of enabling provisions left undecided after representative claim struck out.
|
24 November 2015 |
|
Board decisions extending skeleton staff tenure without PSRC approval entitled employees to unpaid salaries and damages.
Labour law – entitlement to remuneration for work performed beyond retained term; corporate governance – effect of subsidiary Boards' resolutions and whether PSRC approval required; damages for non-payment of salaries and award of interest and costs.
|
24 November 2015 |
|
Time-bar is jurisdictional: out-of-time review filed without extension dismissed with costs.
* Civil procedure – Review – Limitation period – Review application must be filed within 30 days (Law of Limitation Act Cap. 89) – filing one day late renders application incompetent unless extension sought and granted.
* Preliminary objections – Notice – While notice of preliminary objections is good practice, issues going to jurisdiction (such as time bar) may be considered without prior notice.
* Jurisdiction – Time bar affects jurisdiction and the court may raise or entertain it suo moto or when raised without notice.
|
20 November 2015 |
|
Insufficient and unsafe visual identification plus an improperly recorded cautioned statement rendered the conviction unsustainable.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – Visual identification at night – factors required for reliable identification (lighting, distance, duration, prior knowledge) and need for identification parade where identity in issue; * Evidence – Admissibility – improperly recorded cautioned statement must be expunged; * Proof – burden remains on prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; circumstantial facts (hiding in relative's house) insufficient alone.
|
20 November 2015 |
|
Plaintiff failed to prove conditions precedent to bond claims; surety not liable and claim dismissed with costs.
Construction contract; Advance payment bond and Performance bond; surety liability; conditions precedent: proof of advance payment, notice/declaration of default certified by registered engineer, compliance with employer’s obligations and claims procedures; claimant’s failure to mitigate losses; default judgment against contractor.
|
20 November 2015 |
|
Appellate court upheld conviction based on reliable identification and admissible retracted cautioned statement, dismissing the appeal.
* Criminal law – Armed robbery – visual identification by victims who were ordered to lie down – reliability and corroboration by identification parade. * Identification parade – compliance with Police General Order (P.G.O. No.232) – collateral corroboration of dock identification (Exh.P2). * Evidence – retracted cautioned statement – admissibility after inquiry into voluntariness and corroborative value (Exh.P1); Section 29 Evidence Act. * Appellate procedure – conviction under s.366(1)(a)(ii) and affirmation of trial sentence. * Minor inconsistencies between witnesses do not necessarily defeat prosecution case.
|
20 November 2015 |
|
A bank that pays on forged or discrepant cheques without adequate verification is liable; an unsupported large general damages award was reduced.
* Banking law — Banker-customer relationship — Duty to verify genuineness of cheques — Payment on forged or discrepant signatures without proof of proper confirmation attracts liability.
* Evidence — Electronic/telephone confirmation — bank must prove verification (e.g., call records) when relying on telephonic confirmation.
* Estoppel by negligence — banker cannot rely on customer's carelessness unless customer induced the bank to pay.
* Damages — General damages require evidential basis and reasons; unsupported awards may be set aside and substituted.
* Interest — Trial court's interest awards upheld as reasonable.
|
16 November 2015 |
|
Applicant failed to show irreparable loss or inadequate remedy at law; injunction dismissed with costs.
Civil procedure – Temporary injunction – requirements: serious triable issue; irreparable injury; balance of convenience – inadequacy of damages must be specifically demonstrated; mere assertions insufficient (Attilio v Mbowe; Tanzania Cotton Marketing Board v COGECOT).
|
13 November 2015 |
|
An application is incompetent if the enabling rule or specific sub‑rule is wrongly cited or not specified.
Civil Procedure – setting aside dismissal for want of prosecution – necessity to cite the correct enabling provision and specific sub‑rule; wrong citation or non‑citation renders application incompetent; Order IX Rules 3, 4, 9 CPC; Article 107A(2)(e) – limitation on technicalities cannot cure defective citation.
|
13 November 2015 |
|
Suit was incompetent for suing the wrong legal person; trial proceedings, judgment and decree quashed.
Local government law — Proper party to suit under section 12(1) Local Government (District Authorities) Act — Misjoinder of party renders suit incompetent; Civil Procedure — Order I Rule 10(2) — Amendment of parties is for trial court, not appellate court; Procedural fairness — Late raising of improper-party point does not preclude fair hearing where rejoinder was afforded.
|
13 November 2015 |
|
Night-time visual and voice identification without essential particulars is unreliable; conviction quashed for lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal law – Identification evidence – Visual identification at night; torchlight observations; voice recognition – reliability and Waziri Amani factors (time, distance, lighting, prior acquaintance); failure to name suspect at earliest opportunity undermines credibility; conviction unsafe where prosecution fails to eliminate possibilities of mistaken identity.
|
13 November 2015 |
|
A defective jurat on the applicant’s affidavit rendered the extension application incompetent and it was struck out.
* Civil procedure – extension of time – competency of supporting affidavit – jurat must disclose identification or personal knowledge of deponent by Commissioner for Oaths; defective affidavit renders application incompetent. * Procedural law – preliminary objections – where foundational affidavit is fatally defective, other objections need not be considered. * Limitation questions and Court of Appeal procedural rules raised but not adjudicated due to affidavit defect.
|
13 November 2015 |