|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2014 |
|
|
Preliminary objections to a libel plaint were dismissed: pleadings found to state material facts, properly signed and verified.
Civil procedure — Preliminary objection — Pleadings — Order VI rr.3,14,15(2) — Distinction between material facts and evidence — Verification clause (knowledge vs belief) — Pleadings must state facts, not legal argument.
|
31 December 2014 |
|
Applicant granted temporary injunction against respondents’ publications; court found no fair comment or public interest defence.
* Defamation — Interim injunctions to restrain publication — balance between freedom of expression and protection of reputation; * Fair comment and qualified privilege — availability as defences at interlocutory stage; * Public interest — scope and relevance in justifying potentially defamatory reportage.
|
29 December 2014 |
|
|
12 December 2014 |
| November 2014 |
|
|
Appeal allowed: conviction for forcible entry quashed for lack of evidence proving violent or unusual entry by the applicant.
Criminal law – Forcible entry (s.85 Penal Code) – requirement to prove violent entry (force, threats, breaking, or collection of an unusual number of people) – proof beyond reasonable doubt – role of caution statements and evidence of consent/agreements in land occupation disputes (wakf land).
|
27 November 2014 |
|
A dormant company failing to convene meetings or file returns can be wound up as just and equitable where no opposition is shown.
Companies law – Winding up – Just and equitable ground – Dormant company, failure to hold meetings, non-filing of statutory returns and death/non‑residence of active director – Advertisement of petition and no objections – Ex parte proof sufficient to grant winding up.
|
26 November 2014 |
|
Conviction for unlawful possession of radioactive material quashed due to inadequate, contradictory and hearsay-dependent forensic evidence.
Criminal law – Unlawful possession of radioactive material – Elements: identity, possession, unlawfulness; Evidence – Contradictory laboratory reports and weak expert testimony; Hearsay – Unproduced international report; Misjoinder of counts – prejudicial to proper proof; Standard of proof – beyond reasonable doubt.
|
24 November 2014 |
|
Application to quash terrorism charges dismissed; charge description error not fatal, particulars sufficient for committal and trial.
Criminal procedure – Revision under s.372 CPA – Committal proceedings – Sufficiency of charge particulars – Interpretation of charge in light of Prevention of Terrorism Act and GN No. 283/2012 (designation of terrorist groups).
|
7 November 2014 |
|
No enforceable loan contract existed; applicant failed to meet conditions precedent, so bank properly refused the loan.
Contract formation – application versus agreement; conditions precedent to loan disbursement; bank’s mandate under facility agreement; requirement of security as condition precedent; credibility of bribery allegation; no breach absent contract or satisfied conditions.
|
5 November 2014 |
| October 2014 |
|
|
Minister’s reinstatement order is enforceable as a decree, but wage arrears for periods not worked are not compensable by court order.
* Labour law – enforcement of Minister’s decision as a decree under Security of Employment Act (s.28(1)(c)).
* Security of Employment Act – s.40A(5) read with s.36 and Severance Allowance Act – employer liable to statutory compensation and 12 months’ wages where reinstatement order not complied with; no automatic entitlement to wage arrears for period absent.
* Execution – limits of relief in execution of reinstatement orders; proof of claimed sums.
|
31 October 2014 |
|
Including an interlocutory order in an appeal tied to a later final decision is permissible; preliminary objections dismissed.
Appeal procedure – interlocutory versus final orders – s.43(2) Magistrates Courts Act – omnibus memorandum of appeal – time bar – correction of erroneous statutory citation in written submissions.
|
31 October 2014 |
|
A plea of guilty is equivocal if facts omit essential elements (unlawfulness, victim's age); conviction quashed and appellant discharged.
Criminal law – Rape (statutory) – Essentials must be stated: unlawfulness and victim's age; plea of guilty – equivocal plea invalidates conviction – appeal from guilty plea permissible where admitted facts do not constitute the offence – discretionary discharge instead of remittal due to time served and victim welfare.
|
27 October 2014 |
|
Tenant’s termination for alleged defects failed for lack of notice; landlord awarded general damages for harsh termination.
Land law – Lease disputes – whether notice of defects was given before termination; allocation of repair/maintenance obligations under lease; proof required for specific damages; damages for wrongful or harsh termination.
|
24 October 2014 |
|
Whether the prosecution proved a principal–agent relationship and whether a trial court’s “discharge” under s230 is curable to an acquittal.
* Criminal law – Corruption – Principal–agent relationship as an essential ingredient – proof required for corrupt transaction under section 15(1) of the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Act.
* Criminal procedure – No case to answer – Section 230 CPA – distinction between ‘discharge’ and ‘acquittal’ and curability of descriptive error.
* Evidence – Credibility of principal’s testimony decisive in establishing agency and prima facie case.
|
10 October 2014 |
|
S.230 dismissal must properly read as acquittal; prosecution failed to prove agency and thus no prima facie corruption case.
* Criminal law – Corrupt transaction (s.15(1) Prevention and Combating of Corruption Act) – necessity to prove principal–agent relationship as element of offence; * Criminal procedure – Section 230 CPA – effect of "no case to answer" finding; remedial substitution of "acquittal" for erroneous "discharge"; * Evidence – sufficiency of prosecution case and prima facie requirement.
|
10 October 2014 |
|
Preliminary-inquiry substitution of manslaughter with murder under the wrong statute, without hearing accused, was void and amounted to abuse of process.
* Criminal procedure – amendment/substitution of charges at preliminary inquiry – s.234(1) CPA inapplicable at committal stage; substitution must follow s.91 and s.150 and NPS Act provisions. * Right to be heard – prosecutor must state circumstances giving rise to aggravated charge and accused must be heard before bail is cancelled (s.150 CPA). * Charge particulars – charge must disclose essential ingredients of offence (actus reus and mens rea). * Abuse of process – prosecutor’s use of wrong provision and failure to follow procedure may amount to malicious abuse of process.
|
10 October 2014 |
|
Granting administration after an unnotified transfer and defective citation vitiated the probate proceedings.
* Probate and Administration of Estates – appointment of administrator – minor named executor cannot receive probate; alternate petitioners allowed under s.23 and s.33. * Probate procedure – transfer of file and institution of fresh probate – requirement to notify parties and comply with Probate Rules (Forms/citation). * Will validity – contested wills to be dealt with under Rule 90 or fraud inquiry. * Family/clan recognition of marriage – evidentiary weight where not rebutted under Law of Marriage Act.
|
8 October 2014 |
|
Reported
Suit dismissed because arbitration award conclusively determined plaintiff had no exclusive development rights over Mbudya Island.
Arbitration award – finality and preclusive effect – whether judicial proceedings may proceed on issues conclusively determined by arbitrators; interpretation of contractual clauses on development rights; application of Arbitration Act ss.15–16 and Arbitration Rules 5–6.
|
2 October 2014 |
| September 2014 |
|
|
High Court struck out application for leave to appeal as incompetent, directing applicants to seek extension/leave at the Court of Appeal.
Labour law – Appeals – Section 57 Labour Institutions Act – automatic right of appeal on point of law; jurisdiction – proper forum for extension of time/leave to appeal; procedural competence of applications before High Court vs Court of Appeal.
|
26 September 2014 |
|
High Court has jurisdiction over land dispute valued at Tshs.70m and Order XXXVII r.8(1)(b) suffices to seek entry for repairs.
Land law – High Court jurisdiction in land disputes – Land Disputes Courts Act (Cap. 216) ss.37(a),(b) – Pecuniary thresholds; Civil Procedure – Order XXXVII r.8(1)(b) – Court may authorise entry into land/buildings for purposes such as repairs; omission to cite r.8(1)(a) not fatal.
|
23 September 2014 |
|
High Court may determine jurisdictional competence of Primary Courts in probate matters; factual objections not preliminary law.
Jurisdiction — High Court power to inquire into Primary Court administration decisions; Magistrate's Court Act Fifth Schedule — scope; Preliminary objection — must raise a pure point of law; factual disputes not suitable for preliminary disposal; Inherent powers of High Court (s.95 CPC).
|
19 September 2014 |
|
Applicant’s dismissal for non-appearance was set aside where registrar’s communication about a different session constituted sufficient cause.
Labour procedure – setting aside dismissal for non-appearance – sufficient cause under Order IX Rule 4 CPC – registrar’s communication about venue/session – restoration of struck-out revision.
|
19 September 2014 |
|
Amendment joining defendants was permissible; corporate pleadings should show board authorization, but procedural defects are curable.
Civil procedure – amendment of plaints (Order VI r.17; Order I r.3) – where causes of action arise from same series of transactions joinder and amendment permitted; Procedural rules – cardinal principle – curability of non-fatal breaches; Corporate litigation – requirement to show board/board-of-directors resolution authorising suit or defence; Signing and verification of pleadings – advocate’s signature/verification without express client authority is irregular but curable; remedies include production or amendment rather than automatic striking out.
|
19 September 2014 |
|
The court upheld that the employer named in the employment contract is liable for terminal benefits; no basis to transfer liability to a joint‑venture partner.
Labour law — Termination benefits — Employer liability under s.44 of the Employment and Labour Relations Act — Identity of employer — Corporate personality of a registered company — Liability of joint‑venture partners and need for proof of liquidation to shift liability.
|
17 September 2014 |
|
Applicant granted extension of time to file revision after CMA award was delivered late and without notifying the parties.
Labour law — Extension of time — Rule 56(1) Labour Court Rules — ‘Sufficient cause’ and lack of dilatory conduct — Late and unnotified delivery of CMA award may justify enlargement of time.
|
17 September 2014 |
|
Applicant's extension application struck out for incorrect citation; Rule 56(1) Labour Court Rules is the proper enabling provision, refile allowed.
* Labour law – extension of time – proper enabling provision – Rule 56(1) Labour Court Rules (G.N. No.106/2007) is the source of power to extend time for applications before the Labour Court. * Procedure – wrong citation/non-citation of enabling provisions renders application incompetent and liable to be struck out. * Procedure – defective combination of forms and omission of mandatory contents under Rule 24(2)(e) may invalidate an application. * Relief – court may strike out defective application but grant opportunity to refile in interest of justice.
|
17 September 2014 |
|
Failure to hold preliminary hearing was not fatal; evidence established armed robbery and appellants sentenced to 30 years.
* Criminal procedure — Preliminary hearing under s.192 Criminal Procedure Act — mandatory but non-fatal where no prejudice shown; curable under curative provisions. * Criminal procedure — Duty to inform accused of right to defence s.231(1) — compliance may be implied from record and not fatal absent miscarriage of justice. * Substantive criminal law — Theft converted to armed robbery where theft is effected by use of dangerous/offensive instrument or in company (s.287A). * Evidence — Visual identification in daylight and corroboration by arresting officers can sustain conviction. * Sentencing — Armed robbery attracts statutory minimum 30-year term under s.287A.
|
15 September 2014 |
|
A suit instituted and prosecuted by a person not entitled to represent an association, without complying with Order 1 r.8, is incurably defective and dismissible.
* Civil procedure – Representation – Unincorporated association/numerous persons – Order 1 r.8 Civil Procedure Code – Mandatory requirement for court’s permission to sue or defend on behalf of all – Failure to comply renders plaint incurably defective. * Advocacy – Person not on roll of advocates cannot assume role of advocate to institute or conduct proceedings for others without complying with procedural prerequisites.
|
12 September 2014 |
|
A revision under s.44(1)(b) Cap.11 is not available where a statutory right of appeal exists; revision struck out.
Civil procedure – Revision v. appeal – High Court revisional power under s.44(1)(b) Cap.11; where a statutory right of appeal exists, revision is not available as an alternative; incompetency and striking out of revision application; costs — each party to bear own costs.
|
12 September 2014 |
|
Whether an employment relationship existed and whether a 'golden handshake' barred claims for unpaid employment benefits.
Employment law – determination of employment relationship – factors: control, hours, integration, economic dependence, provision of tools, exclusivity; effect of settlement ('mkono wa heri') on later claims; admissibility of evidence; procedural fairness of termination.
|
10 September 2014 |
|
Conviction based on uncorroborated, delayed visual and voice identification was unsafe; appeal allowed and convictions quashed.
Criminal law — Visual identification — Cardinal Principle — Delay in reporting/naming suspects to police undermines identification; corroboration required. Voice identification — unreliable without expert support. Prosecution’s burden to prove identity beyond reasonable doubt.
|
8 September 2014 |
|
In defamation claims the plaint must quote the exact allegedly defamatory words verbatim; omission renders the plaint incompetent.
Defamation — pleadings — plaint must set out the precise words complained of verbatim; attachments do not cure omission — cause of action — Order VII CPC — preliminary objection as pure point of law.
|
5 September 2014 |
|
Res judicata requires all elements proved; being named as heir does not make one a party and defeats the plea.
* Civil procedure – res judicata – elements must be proved cumulatively: competent court, same subject matter/issues, finality, same parties/title. * Probate proceedings – being named as heir does not make one a party for res judicata purposes. * Chamber summons (Order XLIII & s.95 CPC) – Competence to challenge inclusion of property in estate must be determined before hearing. * High Court guidance – remittal for rehearing and directions to District Court under s.44(1)(a) Magistrates Court Act.
|
5 September 2014 |
|
Tenant's damages claim after eviction dismissed where eviction procedures were lawful and losses were unproven.
Landlord–tenant law; lawful eviction procedure and notices; burden of proof for claimed losses after eviction; claims for lost cash and property require credible proof.
|
3 September 2014 |
| August 2014 |
|
|
Trial court erred in deciding "no case to answer" on written submissions without allowing appellant reply; judgment set aside.
Civil procedure — "no case to answer" after plaintiff's case — defendant's written submissions — written submissions have no evidential value — right to fair hearing and natural justice — requirement to invite replies and make ruling before judgment — remittal to trial court for proper procedure.
|
29 August 2014 |
|
Lower court’s piecemeal hearing and mid‑hearing competence objections breached fair hearing; proceedings set aside and remitted for rehearing.
Civil procedure – setting aside ex parte decree – consolidated chamber summons for extension of time and setting aside decree – obligation to hear cumulatively – competence objections to be taken as preliminary objections – right to fair hearing and principles of natural justice – nullification and rehearing.
|
29 August 2014 |
|
High Court has s.372(1) jurisdiction to examine subordinate court records; one affidavit paragraph expunged, objections otherwise dismissed.
Criminal procedure — Revision jurisdiction — High Court’s power under s.372(1) to call for and examine subordinate court records; prematurity and committal issues to be dealt with on merits; substitution of charge effect; affidavit formalities — impermissible prayers expunged; incorrect citation of enabling provision not necessarily fatal.
|
22 August 2014 |
|
Preliminary objections to a revision application for improper affidavit and wrong enabling provisions were overruled; hearing set.
* Criminal procedure – Revision under s.372 Criminal Procedure Act – Effect of 2002 amendment limiting revision of interlocutory/preliminary orders.
* Procedure – Competence of application – Whether affidavit may include references to statutory provisions or contains inadmissible legal argument.
* Judicial practice – Non-citation of specific subsections not necessarily fatal to competence; access to justice versus technical pitfalls.
|
18 August 2014 |
|
Lower court’s suo motu computation of decretal sums without hearing breached fair hearing; proceedings set aside and remitted.
Execution of decrees – requirements of Order XXI – show-cause proceedings; Natural justice – right to be heard – court cannot decide new issues suo motu without reopening proceedings; Jurisdiction – court must decide its jurisdiction before proceeding; Remittal – nullification of irregular proceedings and rehearing before another magistrate.
|
18 August 2014 |
|
An application under s.44(1)(a) must expressly state the directions sought and cannot be used to obtain revisional orders.
* Criminal procedure – High Court supervisory powers under s.44(1)(a) Magistrates Courts Act – scope limited; cannot be used to obtain revisional orders.
* Civil/criminal practice – Originating chamber summons must expressly specify reliefs sought and cite enabling law; reliefs not supplied in submissions.
* Evidence/formalities – Jurat technicality – place of oath disclosed at bottom of jurat is sufficient.
|
13 August 2014 |
|
A supporting affidavit lacking the Commissioner for Oaths’ name in the jurat is incurably defective and renders the application incompetent.
Procedure – Affidavits – Jurat – omission of the name of Commissioner for Oaths in jurat – omission is fatal and renders affidavit incurably defective; no amendment permitted after preliminary objection; application incompetent.
|
13 August 2014 |
|
Convictions quashed where they rested on uncorroborated interested-witness evidence and improperly admitted cautioned statements.
* Evidence — Interested witness: testimony of a witness with an interest requires independent corroboration before forming the basis of conviction.
* Confession/Cautioned statement — A disputed caution statement must be the subject of an inquiry or trial within a trial to test voluntariness and admissibility; documentary statements should be tendered by their maker/recorder.
* Co-accused statements — A self-exculpatory statement of one accused implicating another is of no evidential value against the other unless independently corroborated.
* Fair trial — Procedural irregularities in admitting evidence and failure to give reasons violate the accused's right to a fair trial.
|
11 August 2014 |
|
Application to revoke letters of administration granted by a subordinate court was incompetent for lack of enabling jurisdiction and struck out.
* Probate law – jurisdiction to revoke grants – High Court may revoke grants made by itself under s.3 Cap.352; cannot annul subordinate court grants absent express law.
* Procedure – non‑citation of enabling law or specific subsection is fatal – application incompetent.
* Remedies – grants by subordinate courts should be challenged by appeal or revision, not by direct High Court chamber application where no jurisdiction is shown.
|
8 August 2014 |
| July 2014 |
|
|
High Court ordinary civil registry lacked jurisdiction over the plaintiff's commercial claim; suit struck out.
Jurisdiction – pecuniary limits – interpretation of section 40(3) MCA (2004) – literal vs mischief rule – Hansard as interpretive aid – Commercial Division’s role – striking out for want of jurisdiction.
|
31 July 2014 |
|
Reported
Court struck out High Court suit for want of jurisdiction; 2004 MCA amendment intended to protect Commercial Division, not oust subordinate courts.
Commercial law – pecuniary jurisdiction – interpretation of s.40(3) Magistrates Courts Act (2004) – literal, golden and mischief rules; Hansard as aid to statutory interpretation; allocation of commercial jurisdiction between subordinate courts, Commercial Division and ordinary High Court registry; effect of Court of Appeal precedent (Usambara Sisters) on jurisdictional defects.
|
31 July 2014 |
|
Reported
An appeal filed in the High Court instead of the subordinate court as mandated is incompetent and must be struck out.
Matrimonial appeals — mandatory requirement to file memorandum of appeal in subordinate court under s.80(2) LMA and r.37(1) — filing directly in High Court is incompetent; r.37(4) and r.38(c) do not cure jurisdictional/manner defects; appeal struck out; no order as to costs.
|
31 July 2014 |
|
Revision application struck out for failure to cite mandatory enabling statutory provisions correctly.
Labour law — Revision of CMA award — Mandatory citation of specific statutory provisions (s.91(2) ELRA; Labour Court Rules) — Wrong or omitted citation is fatal — Application struck out rather than decided on merits.
|
31 July 2014 |
|
An unlicensed private money-lender cannot lawfully charge compound interest or validly take security; lease and rent recovery allowed.
Contract law; unlicensed money-lender—illegality of charging compound interest and taking security; validity of 18 October 2003 lease; tenant’s occupation and set-off of proceeds; rent arrears and eviction; each party to bear own costs.
|
25 July 2014 |
|
Failure to correctly cite the enabling legislation rendered the probate application incurably defective and it was struck out with costs.
* Probate procedure – incorrect citation of enabling law – failure to cite specific sub‑rule – application incurably defective.
* Probate Rules – Rule 14 is procedural and does not confer substantive relief.
* Civil Procedure – s.95 inherent powers – limits on curing pleadings omissions where law exists.
* Preliminary objection practice – omission to cite enabling provision goes to jurisdiction/competence and is fatal.
|
24 July 2014 |
|
An application for leave to seek certiorari filed after six months is time‑barred; a struck‑out prior filing does not cure limitation.
• Administrative law – judicial review – time limitation under s.19(3) of Cap. 310 – six‑month rule. • Effect of struck‑out proceedings – strike‑out restores parties to original position and does not extend limitation. • Extension of time – delay in obtaining court records must be addressed by an application for extension supported by affidavit under Cap. 89. • Law of Limitation (Cap. 89) s.3(1) – mandatory dismissal of time‑barred applications.
|
23 July 2014 |
|
Handwriting proof can establish that an accused signed a cautioned statement, but an unsigned/initial‑less page is inadmissible under s.58(2).
Criminal procedure – admissibility of cautioned statement – proof of signature by handwriting comparison – effect of failure to sign or initial each page under s.58(2) – unsigned page inadmissible; voluntariness allegations not decided where not properly raised at admissibility stage.
|
22 July 2014 |