High Court of Tanzania

This is the second level in the Judiciary justice delivery hierarchy. It has both appellate and original powers on civil and criminal matters. It also hears appeals from the Courts of Resident Magistrate, the District Courts, and the District Land and Housing Tribunals in exercise of their original, appellate and/or revisional jurisdiction. The High Court is divided into Zones and specialized Divisions. 

Physical address
24 Kivukoni Road, P O Box: S.L.P. 9004
50 judgments

Court registries

  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
50 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
December 2021
Leave to appeal is discretionary and confined to issues decided by the High Court; leave refused for lack of arguable issues.
Appellate procedure – Leave to appeal – Leave is discretionary and restrictive; can only be based on matters decided in the High Court judgment, order, decree or findings; issues not determined by the High Court cannot ground leave; section 5(1)(c) Appellate Jurisdiction Act; section 24A(2) Advocates Act – powers of full bench.
17 December 2021
A non‑advocate lacks statutory right to appeal Advocates Committee decisions; appeal dismissed, no costs.
* Advocates Act (s.24A) – Right of appeal – appellate right is statutory and applies to advocates on the Roll; * Statutory interpretation – Disciplinary Rules read in light of parent Act; * Locus standi – non‑advocate lacks right to appeal Advocates Committee decisions; * Discrimination – profession‑specific regulation not unconstitutional discrimination; * Limitation/certificate of delay – issue not finally determined as matter disposed on locus.
14 December 2021
An application for leave to appeal an interlocutory grant of leave for judicial review was dismissed as premature and not appealable.
Appellate jurisdiction – leave to appeal – interlocutory orders – appealability of a ruling granting leave for judicial review – statutory right of appeal – prematurity – notice of appeal versus institution of civil appeal.
14 December 2021
Leave granted to applicant to seek judicial review of alleged procedural unfairness and discriminatory dismissal by police authority.
* Judicial review — leave to apply — three preconditions: arguable case, sufficient interest, six‑month time limit * Administrative law — police disciplinary procedure — enhancement of punishment; requirement to afford accused opportunity to show cause * Natural justice — right to be heard before varying or increasing disciplinary sanction * Equality — allegation of discriminatory treatment/double standards in imposing dismissal against co‑accused * Leave granted to file substantive application for certiorari and mandamus
8 December 2021
Court struck out applicant's status quo application as premature, res judicata and an abuse of court process.
Civil procedure – maintenance of status quo v. interim injunction; Mareva-type relief; Arbitration Act s.13 – need to initiate arbitration before court relief; res judicata/functus officio – repeated applications; abuse of court process; application struck out with costs.
2 December 2021
November 2021
Applicants must seek extension of time to challenge an Industrial Court decision in the Labour Court, not the High Court.
Labour law; jurisdiction – whether High Court may grant extension of time in respect of Industrial Court matters; effect of repeal and savings/transitional provisions of Employment and Labour Relations Act; appropriate forum for challenging Industrial Court decisions (Labour Court).
23 November 2021
Petition striking down section 44(1) dismissed for failure to exhaust alternative remedies and for challenging ministerial power instead of the statute.
* Constitutional law – challenge to statutory provision v. challenge to exercise of ministerial power – appropriate forum for judicial review (certiorari/mandamus) versus constitutional petition. * Procedure – Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act (section 8(2)) – requirement to exhaust adequate alternative remedies before constitutional adjudication. * Civil procedure – parties bound by their pleadings; inconsistent pleadings can render a petition incompetent. * Preliminary objections – competency, exhaustion of remedies, and striking out petitions at preliminary stage.
17 November 2021
High Court may hear challenges to DPP’s use of Article 59B under Article 108(2) where no statutory procedure exists.
* Constitutional law – High Court jurisdiction – Article 108(2) as source of inherent jurisdiction where no statutory procedure exists. * Scope of Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act (Cap. 3) – limited to Articles 12–29; does not govern challenges to Article 59B. * Procedural law – resort to section 2(3) of JALA and common law/English practice where local statute is silent. * Director of Public Prosecutions’ powers under Article 59B – subject to judicial review under Article 108(2). * Preliminary objections based on Cap. 3 dismissed.
17 November 2021
Leave to appeal granted on arguable issues of High Court jurisdiction to judicially review tax administration decisions and forum shopping.
* Administrative law – Judicial review – Whether High Court may review Commissioner General’s decisions under Tax Administration laws. * Civil procedure – Leave to appeal – requirement of arguable point of law. * Procedural law – Forum shopping/‘riding two horses’ by pursuing judicial review and statutory tax appeals. * Extension of time – duty to account for each day of delay.
16 November 2021
Court ordered immediate eviction under Order XXI r.21(1) but refused attachment for lack of particulars.
Execution of decree – eviction of judgment debtors under Order XXI r.21(1) CPC; attachment and sale of movables requires sufficient particulars; appointment of private agent to execute eviction.
10 November 2021
October 2021
Applicant had standing for judicial review but PPAA correctly found lack of authority to represent consortium; application dismissed with costs.
* Public procurement – consortiums/joint ventures – requirement that a lead member have authority to bind consortium and confirm appointment by power of attorney (Regulation 9(10)(d)). * Administrative law – judicial review – locus standi/standing of an applicant who participated in procurement process. * Administrative law – certiorari – review limited to legality, procedural propriety and reasonableness; appellate substitution not permitted. * Contract/procurement documents – Joint Bidding Agreement as relevant material for determining authority to act for consortium.
28 October 2021
Applicant had standing but lacked authority to bind the consortium; PPAA lawfully dismissed the appeal and its decision was upheld.
* Public procurement – judicial review – standing (locus standi) to challenge administrative procurement decisions – participation in tendering process sufficient for High Court standing. * Public procurement – Regulation 9(10)(d) – lead member must have authority to bind consortium and confirm by power of attorney at contract award. * Administrative law – certiorari/mandamus – review limited to legality, procedural fairness and relevance of materials considered. * Joint Bidding Agreement – relevance in assessing authority to represent consortium.
28 October 2021
Court overruled most preliminary objections to a leave application but expunged argumentative parts of the supporting affidavit.
Application for leave to appeal — requirements for annexures — affidavit drafting — permissible narrative versus impermissible legal argument — hearsay and personal knowledge — attestation by Commissioner for Oaths and judicial notice — Oaths Act requirements and curability of defects — verification clauses and numbering — authority of State Attorney to represent Solicitor General.
25 October 2021
A reference, not an appeal, is the prescribed mode to challenge a Registrar's refusal to remit court fees; the appeal was struck out.
* Court Fees Rules (GN No.247 of 2018) – rule 6(6) – reference to High Court against Registrar's refusal to remit fees – proper modality. * Statutory interpretation – specific procedural rule prevails over general Civil Procedure Code provisions. * Procedure – incompetence and striking out where wrong mode (appeal) used instead of prescribed reference.
21 October 2021
The applicant’s leave to judicially review an already adjudicated PPAA decision was barred as res judicata and abuse of process.
* Public Procurement – judicial review – leave to apply for certiorari and mandamus – whether barred by res judicata. * Civil procedure – res judicata and functus officio – reopening previously adjudicated decision. * Civil procedure – abuse of court process – frivolous and vexatious applications seeking to re‑litigate settled matters.
20 October 2021
Court dismisses respondent's objection that the applicant's constitutional challenge is frivolous, finding factual issues require evidence.
Constitutional challenge to electoral provisions; preliminary objection; frivolous and vexatious petitions; section 6(e) Cap.3 particulars; Mukisa demurrer principle; factual issues versus pure points of law; jurisdiction to adjudicate alleged inconsistency with international instruments.
20 October 2021
Applicants were denied fair disciplinary process; court quashed discontinuation and ordered reinstatement by mandamus.
Administrative law – Judicial review – Certiorari and mandamus – Disciplinary proceedings – Natural justice – Adequate notice and formal charge – Regulation 17(a),(b),(d) of ITA Examination Regulations.
19 October 2021
Constitutional petition dismissed for failure to exhaust alternative remedies and for an incurably defective affidavit.
* Constitutional jurisdiction – Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act – section 8(2) – requirement to exhaust alternative remedies before invoking High Court powers. * Civil procedure – Order IX Rule 3 – restoration/set aside of dismissal for non-appearance as available remedy. * Judicial discipline – Judiciary Administration Act – complaint mechanism for judicial misconduct. * Professional discipline – Advocate Act/Tanganyika Law Society – remedies for advocate misconduct. * Procedure – Affidavit must contain facts, not legal argument (Order XIX Rule 3) – incurable defects.
19 October 2021
Leave granted to challenge mobile-money levy regulations after finding timeliness, arguable case and sufficient interest.
Judicial review — leave stage — tests for grant of leave: timeliness, prima facie/arguable case, sufficient interest — challenge to GN No. 496A of 2021 as ultra vires, discriminatory and procedurally defective.
13 October 2021
Applicants granted extension to file reference due to inability to obtain certified ruling and non-negligent delay.
Extension of time — necessity of certified copy of judgment to prepare grounds — accounting for delay — discretion to extend time — illegality not pleaded in affidavit cannot be relied upon.
13 October 2021
Court lacked jurisdiction; petitioner should have pursued judicial review, so constitutional petition dismissed.
Constitutional jurisdiction; alternative remedies and exhaustion requirement; judicial review under Part VII of the Law Reform (Fatal Accidents and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act; effect of sections 8(2) and 8(4) of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act; curability of clerical/pleading defects under overriding-objective provisions.
12 October 2021
Notifying the public of an ex-employee's resignation was privileged; no defamatory innuendo or malice proved.
Defamation — publication of resignation notices — defamation by innuendo requires proof of extrinsic facts; Qualified privilege — reciprocity of interest where principal notifies third-party stakeholders to avoid liability; Malice — absence of malice where reasonable operational reasons for publication exist; Causation and damages — claimant must prove nexus between publication and alleged loss.
12 October 2021
Speaker lawfully referred C.A.G.’s media remarks to committee; Article 143(6) immunity covers only official audit acts.
Parliamentary powers to summon persons; scope of Article 143(6) immunity for the C.A.G.; distinction between official audit communications and extraneous public commentary; limits on privilege for statements not contained in reports to the President / Parliament.
7 October 2021
September 2021
A constitutional petition was struck out as res sub judice and an abuse of process due to parallel disciplinary proceedings.
Constitutional procedure – Res sub judice and abuse of court process – Availability of alternative statutory remedies under Advocates Act – Appropriate remedy (strike out v stay) when parallel disciplinary proceedings are pending.
29 September 2021
High Court granted bail under EOCCA where alleged pecuniary loss exceeded subordinate court limit, imposing strict financial and supervisory conditions.
* Criminal procedure — Bail under EOCCA — Jurisdiction of High Court under s.29(4)(a),(d) where alleged pecuniary loss exceeds subordinate court threshold. * Bailability — offences under Penal Code and EOCCA held bailable; uncontested application granted. * Bail conditions — cash deposit or immovable property security, execution of bonds, sureties, surrender of travel documents, travel restrictions, verification by trial court.
24 September 2021
Court dismissed constitutional petition for lack of jurisdiction for failure to exhaust alternative remedies.
Constitutional remedies – exhaustion of alternative remedies under Cap. 3 (s.4(5), s.8(2)); preliminary objections – Mukisa Biscuits test (pure point of law); res subjudice – civil vs criminal proceedings; non‑joinder – necessary party vs non‑suable judicial entities; frivolous/vexatious – requires evidential hearing.
23 September 2021
Delegated regulations are amenable to judicial review; board-resolution and cause-of-action objections dismissed as factual.
Judicial review – Delegated/subsidiary legislation – Regulations amenable to judicial review despite being "written law"; Preliminary objections – Mukisa Biscuits test – pure point of law vs factual issues; Legal authorisation – board resolution requirement is a factual matter, not a preliminary point of law; Cause of action / locus standi – requires evidence, not suitable for preliminary objection; Procedure – joining the Attorney General renders leave applications inter partes.
8 September 2021
Affidavit relying on counsel's unsworn statements is hearsay and can render a judicial-review application incompetent.
Judicial review — leave to apply — affidavit requirements — hearsay, opinion and conclusions inadmissible — advocate referenced as source must swear — expunction of defective paragraphs — insufficient remaining averments renders application incompetent.
8 September 2021
Applicant failed to prove alleged fraud or lack of spousal consent; bank not liable and suit dismissed with costs.
* Land law – Mortgage of matrimonial home – validity and effect of registered mortgage deed; spousal consent requirements under section 114 Land Act. * Evidence – burden of proof and heightened standard where fraud is alleged; requirement to prove forgery or collusion. * Banking law – bank’s rights to recover secured indebtedness and to enforce mortgage upon borrower’s default. * Remedies – discharge of mortgage by third party and bank’s non-liability absent proof of bank’s fraud or collusion.
2 September 2021
August 2021
Application for prerogative relief struck out for failure to exhaust available statutory labour remedies; jurat defect held minor.
Administrative law – prerogative orders (certiorari/mandamus) – alternative statutory remedies in labour disputes – necessity to exhaust labour dispute mechanisms (CMA/Labour Court) before judicial review; Affidavit formalities – jurat defects curable under overriding objective.
27 August 2021
Leave application dismissed for failing mandatory rule 5(2)(a) statement and being time‑barred under rule 6.
Judicial review — leave to apply — procedural requirements: rule 5(2)(a) statement mandatory; time limit — rule 6 six‑month bar; preliminary objections — Mukisa Biscuits test (pure point of law) — overtaken by events/functus officio requires factual inquiry and not suitable as preliminary point.
26 August 2021
Failure to attach the required statement to a judicial review application is fatal and renders the application incompetent.
Administrative law – Judicial review – Procedural compliance – Rule 8(1)(a) and Rule 11 (2014 Rules) require a statement in respect of which leave was granted to accompany chamber summons; omission is fatal; rule 5 (leave application) document cannot substitute; overriding objective does not cure mandatory procedural defects.
25 August 2021
A traffic conviction supports civil negligence; owner and insurer liable; limited funeral, travel and general damages awarded.
Road-traffic negligence – criminal traffic conviction admissible but not conclusive in civil proceedings; evidential weight assessed. ; Fatal-accident damages – heads recoverable: reasonable funeral and incidental expenses, loss of dependency; future earnings require credible proof. ; Vicarious liability – vehicle owner liable for driver’s negligence; insurer liable under third-party policy and Motor Vehicles Insurance Act to satisfy judgment.
17 August 2021
Court granted extension to file leave for judicial review to avoid prejudice despite earlier procedural impropriety.
* Administrative law – Judicial review – Time limits for leave – Rule 6, GN No.324 of 2014 (six‑month limitation). * Limitation law – Section 14(1) Law of Limitation Act – appropriateness of enlargement of time. * Procedural discretion – striking out versus granting extension to avoid prejudice and duplication of proceedings.
5 August 2021
Applicant's challenge to automatic academic discontinuation failed; court found regulations operated automatically and no procedural unfairness occurred.
University regulations – academic discontinuation for GPA below threshold – automatic operation of regulations; Judicial review – prerogative reliefs (certiorari, mandamus) – requirements and limits; Administrative law – duty to give reasons arises where decision basis is unknown; Natural justice – right to be heard satisfied by internal appeal process when invoked; Validity of administrative communications – signature by officer vs requirement for Chairman's signature; Retrospectivity of regulations – applicant failed to prove retrospective application.
2 August 2021
July 2021
Constitutional petition dismissed as frivolous and abusive where Court of Appeal review remedies were available and exhausted.
* Constitutional jurisdiction – BRADEA – limits where alternative remedies exist or where petitions are frivolous or vexatious; * Finality of Court of Appeal review (Rule 66(7)) – effect on constitutional petitions; * Civil procedure – abuse of process by seeking constitutional review of Court of Appeal decisions; * Constitutional rights – allegations of denial of right to appeal and discrimination require evidential support.
13 July 2021
June 2021
Commission’s dismissal was unlawful and unfairly conducted; tribunal’s evidence lapses rendered the decision quashable.
Administrative law – Judicial review – Illegality and excess of jurisdiction; Breach of natural justice – failure to supply material exhibit and denial of right to prepare defence; Failure to call crucial witness – miscarriage of justice; Remedies – certiorari and mandamus ordered.
23 June 2021
Where the High Court orders the Registrar to refer a disciplinary complaint, a party cannot pre‑empt that referral by filing an overlapping complaint.
* Advocates Act s.22(2)(b) – suspension pending reference to Disciplinary Committee – procedural primacy of judicial referral. * Advocates disciplinary procedure – where judge orders Registrar to refer complaint, parties cannot pre‑empt by filing overlapping complaints under Rules/sections 10–12. * Jurisdiction – disciplinary proceedings commenced in violation of a specific High Court order are incompetent and liable to be quashed.
21 June 2021
Applicant failed to prove sufficient cause or provide evidence for e‑filing delays; extension denied with costs.
* Civil procedure – extension of time – Application under Section 11(1) AJA – court discretion to grant extension only on sufficient cause. * Electronic filing – Judicature and Application of Laws (Electronic Filing) Rules, 2018 (G.N. No. 148/2018) – Rule 21(1) deems documents filed when submitted electronically but proof of submission/hard copy still required. * Delay – applicant must account for every day of delay and provide contemporaneous evidence; assertions about registry failures require affidavit/evidence from registry (avoid hearsay).
8 June 2021
Doctrine of misnomer cannot be used to amend parties after a preliminary objection; application struck out.
Judicial review — parties properly named and joinder — misnomer/'finger litigation' doctrine — amendment of pleadings after preliminary objection — locus standi of registered trustees; Order I Rules 9 & 10; Order XIV Rule 2; Trustees Incorporation Act.
4 June 2021
May 2021
Conviction quashed where appellant's confession was untested and ammunition chain of custody was unestablished.
Criminal law – Court Martial – unlawful possession of ammunition – admissibility of cautioned/extrajudicial statement – requirement for trial within a trial (Defence Forces Regulations reg.1112.605) where voluntariness is objected – chain of custody and seizure procedures – sufficiency of evidence and safety of conviction; joint representation and conflict of interest.
6 May 2021
April 2021
Leave granted to seek certiorari and mandamus over arguable denial of natural justice in academic disciplinary discontinuation.
* Judicial review – leave to apply for prerogative orders – requirements and six‑month rule (G.N. No. 324/2014). * Administrative law – disciplinary decisions of academic bodies – amenability to judicial review and finality of institutional decisions. * Natural justice – right to be informed of charges, adequate notice, opportunity to prepare and be heard. * Procedure – preliminary objections must raise pure points of law (Mukisa principle); unsubstantiated objections may be overruled.
30 April 2021
High Court may grant judicial review over alleged administrative illegality in tax matters; extension of time granted.
* Judicial review – High Court jurisdiction – scope where administrative illegality or misuse of power is alleged despite tax elements. * Tax law – interaction between Tax Revenue Appeals regime and judicial review – jurisdictional limits and exceptions. * Civil procedure – extension of time – sufficient cause, delay caused by respondents' inaction and alleged illegality. * Abuse of process – concurrent notice of appeal to Tax Revenue Appeal Board not fatal where extension application filed first.
30 April 2021
Leave to seek judicial review granted where Senate disapproved an appeal without reasons, raising arguable procedural unfairness.
Administrative law – Judicial review – Leave stage: duty to show arguable/triable issue and sufficient interest; not a forum for substantive fact-finding – Procedural fairness – Requirement to give reasons – Prerogative remedies: certiorari and mandamus – Admission that applicant was registered and sat exams – Counter-affidavit deponent authorization dispute.
8 April 2021
March 2021
A constitutional petition challenging detention was dismissed as res judicata because the impugned provision's constitutionality had already been decided.
* Constitutional law – res judicata – preclusion of re-litigation where a competent court has finally determined the constitutionality of a statutory provision (Section 36(2) EOCCA). * Criminal procedure / bail – DPP's certificate to object bail (Section 36(2) EOCCA) and its similarity to Section 148 of the Criminal Procedure Act. * Civil procedure – applicability of res judicata to constitutional petitions even with differing parties. * Public interest litigation – costs: no order as to costs.
19 March 2021
A dismissal for being filed out of time bars re-filing the same appeal unless the dismissal is set aside.
Court Martial appeals — finality of dismissal for being out of time; extension of time post-dismissal cannot revive appeal; jurisdiction and functus officio where dismissal not set aside.
10 March 2021
Appeal against Advocates Committee decision struck out as time‑barred for failure to obtain Secretary's certificate excluding delay.
Advocates Act s.24A(1) – thirty‑day appeal period; Advocates (Disciplinary) Rules GN No.120/2018 r.17(4) – exclusion of time while awaiting certified copies; requirement of valid certificate of delay issued by Secretary; timing of request for documents; competence of appeal/time bar.
8 March 2021
February 2021
Applicant awarded damages after unlawful termination of distributorship; separate corporate personality precludes non‑party termination.
Contract law – distributorship agreement – existence and proof by certified copy and supporting exhibits; corporate personality – distinct companies and non‑party cannot validly terminate contract; breach – premature termination entitling applicant to specific and general damages; interest and costs awarded.
23 February 2021
Leave granted to seek certiorari/mandamus; time-bar and factual service issues deferred to main application.
Judicial review—leave to apply for prerogative orders—time limitation and service—audi alteram partem—ultra vires regulatory challenge—arguable case and sufficient interest test.
9 February 2021
Applicant granted leave to seek judicial review of dismissal due to arguable jurisdictional and natural justice defects.
Judicial review – prerogative orders (certiorari, mandamus) – time limitation and when clock starts; jurisdiction of disciplinary/appeal bodies; breach of natural justice – denial of hearing and reasons; arguable case threshold for leave to apply for judicial review.
9 February 2021