|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2016 |
|
|
High Court granted bail pending committal/trial under EOCCA, requiring half-value deposit and specified surety conditions.
* Economic and Organized Crime Control Act – s.29(4)(d): High Court jurisdiction to hear bail where value involved is Tshs.10,000,000 or more
* Bail pending committal and trial – balancing accused’s liberty against public interest
* s.36(5) (as amended) – mandatory condition to deposit half the amount involved or equivalent property
* Conditions of bail – cash/property deposit, sureties and bonds, surrender of travel documents, movement restriction, verification of sureties
|
19 December 2016 |
|
Alleged illegality in an arbitral award can justify an extension of time to file a setting-aside petition.
* Arbitration — Setting aside arbitral award — Extension of time to file petition — Allegation of illegality as sufficient reason to extend time. * Civil procedure — Application for extension under Limitation Act s.14(1) and CPC s.95 — respondent absence and unopposed application. * Authorities — Devram Valambhia and VIP Engineering: illegality can justify extension.
|
16 December 2016 |
|
A defective verification clause is curable; applicant allowed to file a corrected affidavit within 14 days.
Civil procedure — preliminary objections to chamber summons and affidavit; Advocates Act s.44(2) — drafter identification; Notaries and Commissioners for Oaths Act s.8 — jurat identification; Order VI r.15(2) CPC — verification clause; defects in verification are procedural irregularities and curable; leave to amend affidavit.
|
14 December 2016 |
|
Extension of time granted to challenge an arbitral award because alleged illegality constituted sufficient reason.
Arbitration – setting aside arbitral award – extension of time – illegality as sufficient reason for extension; Law of Limitation Act s14(1); Civil Procedure Code s95; Arbitration Act – jurisdiction to set aside awards; authorities: Principal Secretary v Devram Valambhia; VIP Engineering v Citibank.
|
8 December 2016 |
| November 2016 |
|
|
Labour court upholds CMA process but reduces subsistence award from 17 years to five years' salary.
Labour law — CMA ex‑parte proceedings and condonation — service and waiver by default; Procedure — Labour Institutions Rules govern, no special Attorney General ex‑parte regime; Evidence — burden and proof on balance of probabilities; Remedies — entitlement to subsistence pending repatriation; Quantum — miscalculation of subsistence award and reasonable reduction for delay/contributory negligence.
|
25 November 2016 |
| October 2016 |
|
|
The appellant failed to prove contribution to contested matrimonial assets; appeal dismissed and trial division upheld.
Family law – division of matrimonial property; proof of contribution to acquisition; presumption under Law of Marriage Act; evidentiary principle that submissions are not evidence; land allocation and revocation documents; allegation of misappropriation of movables.
|
31 October 2016 |
|
Taking small company property without dishonest intent amounted to misconduct but dismissal was excessive; reinstatement and twelve months' compensation ordered.
Labour law Misconduct v. theft; appropriateness of dismissal as sanction; interpretation of section 40(1)(c) (reinstatement and compensation may be awarded conjunctively); procedural fairness in disciplinary appeals.
|
28 October 2016 |
|
A trial court's failure to determine a charged count renders its judgment defective and warrants setting it aside and remitting the file for a fresh judgment.
* Criminal procedure – defective judgment – omission to determine a charged count – judgment set aside and file remitted for fresh judgment.
* Trial obligations – where prima facie case found and accused defends both counts, court must determine each count – duty to convict or acquit under Criminal Procedure Act.
* Remedy – remittal for composition of fresh judgment preferable where omission to determine a count occurs, distinguished from cases requiring release or retrial.
|
16 October 2016 |
| September 2016 |
|
|
Formal Warning does not bar later court-martial; demotion to Lieutenant was lawful as a commissioned-rank reduction.
* Military law – Formal Warning v Reproof – Formal Warning creates probation and does not bar later disciplinary proceedings; Reproof generally bars subsequent charges. * Effect of transfer – transfer during probation does not by itself nullify a Formal Warning absent rescission. * Sentencing – reduction in rank lawful if remains within "commissioned rank" per C.72(2)(b).
|
1 September 2016 |
| August 2016 |
|
|
Application to stay court proceedings for arbitration dismissed for failing to show readiness or overt steps to invoke arbitration.
Arbitration — stay of court proceedings under section 6 Arbitration Act — applicability of arbitration clause — competency objections (citation to Ordinance and absence of affidavit) — requirement to show willingness/readiness to arbitrate by overt acts or evidence — failure to prove notice of arbitration warrants refusal of stay.
|
31 August 2016 |
|
The applicant must join the corporate borrower/receiver and prove payment and instructions before suing respondents as guarantors.
* Contract/Banking law – Guarantee and indemnity – liability of guarantors is secondary to borrower; necessity to join or pursue corporate borrower/receiver. * Civil procedure – Proper parties/standing – assignee or successor bank must demonstrate right to sue. * Evidence – Proof of payment requires invoices, delivery notes, payment instructions and, where appropriate, calling the supplier; bank statements alone insufficient. * Company law – Salomon principle; separate corporate personality and limited circumstances for lifting the veil.
|
31 August 2016 |
|
Plaintiff’s pecuniary jurisdiction proved, but misnaming a non‑existent defendant rendered the suit incompetent and struck out.
* Civil procedure – Preliminary objection – Pleadings – Sufficiency of pecuniary jurisdictional averment in the plaint – no requirement for amount to appear in final paragraph.
* Civil procedure – Defendant misnomer – Distinct registered names denote different legal entities – suit in name of non‑existent entity is incompetent.
* Civil procedure – Amendment – Order VI r17 not available to cure suit brought in name of non‑existent person.
* Evidence/pleadings – Annexures form part of the plaint; misnaming may be raised by preliminary objection.
|
26 August 2016 |
|
Arrest found lawful and prosecution not malicious; malicious prosecution claim dismissed with costs.
* Tort — Malicious prosecution: necessity to prove prosecution, termination in favour, malice and want of reasonable and probable cause
* Arrest — Lawfulness: reasonable belief and good faith of arresting officer; refusal to obey lawful instructions and to produce licence
* Evidence — Failure to call material witnesses permits adverse inference
* Criminal acquittal — Acquittal alone insufficient to establish malicious prosecution or damages
|
26 August 2016 |
|
Lock-out ended the CEO’s employment but share forfeiture was ineffective; plaintiff's audit report had no evidential value, suit dismissed.
Employment law – alleged breach of service contract; Company law – forfeiture of shares requires strict compliance with Articles of Association; Evidence – forensic/audit report prepared after lock-out and without interviewing subject may be inadmissible or of no weight (fishing expedition); Civil claims – money had and received must be supported by admissible evidence; Effect of lock-out as terminating employment (practical consequence).
|
15 August 2016 |
| July 2016 |
|
|
Employer’s revision dismissed: dismissal substantively unfair, arbitrator’s conduct and award not shown to be vitiated.
Labour law – unfair dismissal – substantive vs procedural fairness; arbitration review – alleged arbitrator misconduct, gross irregularity, excess of jurisdiction and improperly procured award; evidentiary weight of inter‑office communications.
|
29 July 2016 |
|
Acquisition was lawful; valuation legally done but procedurally flawed, awarding further compensation, interest and TSh 20,000,000 general damages.
Land acquisition – validity and area taken – valuation by qualified valuers – procedural defects and omissions – promptness of compensation under Land (Assessment of Value of Land for Compensation) Regulations – interest for delayed payment – omission of shop frames entitling plaintiff to further compensation – special damages require strict proof.
|
20 July 2016 |
|
Court overruled preliminary objections, holding injunction provisions applicable and awarding costs to the applicant.
* Civil procedure – interlocutory relief – temporary injunction – applicability of Order XXXVII Rule 1(a).
* Civil procedure – supplemental powers – section 68(e) of the Civil Procedure Code as a basis for interlocutory orders.
* Civil procedure – preliminary objections – mis‑citation of provisions not necessarily fatal where enabling provisions exist.
* Jurisdiction – pecuniary jurisdiction objection as matter for the main suit, not for interlocutory application.
* Costs – failure to file submissions attracts costs against the defaulting respondent.
|
19 July 2016 |
|
Court overruled preliminary objections, finding temporary injunction properly founded under Order XXXVII r.1(a) and s.68(e); 4th respondent to pay costs.
Civil Procedure – Interlocutory relief – Temporary injunction – applicability of Order XXXVII r.1(a) and section 68(e) as supplemental powers; improper citation of additional sections not fatal to competence; jurisdictional objections to be raised in main suit.
|
19 July 2016 |
|
High Court grants leave to appeal on alleged misdirection over Power of Attorney and confirms s.47(1) does not require certification.
• Appeal — Leave to appeal to Court of Appeal — Application under s.5(1)(c) AJA and s.47(1) Land Disputes Courts Act — Granting of leave.
• Powers of Attorney — Alleged misdirection on applicability and revocation — Issue suitable for appellate determination.
• Appellate procedure — Section 47(1) does not require certified point of law for first or second appeals originating from High Court or District/Resident Courts.
|
1 July 2016 |
| June 2016 |
|
|
Affidavit admitted with correction; paragraphs 18–20 struck for departing from pleadings.
Election petition — admissibility of affidavit under rule 21A GN 447/2010; Order VI r.7 CPC — departure from pleadings (paras 18–20 struck); Evidence Act s.61 — proof of document contents and timing of tendering documents; Evidence Act s.62(1)(b) — statements made to witness admissible to prove that they were made; misnomer — curable omission in deponent's name.
|
29 June 2016 |
|
Expired timber-dealer registration invalidated permits, making the timber seizure lawful.
Forest law – dealer Certificate of Registration – expired registration invalidates lawful dealing; Transit Pass and licence discrepancies – validity and authenticity; Confiscation lawful under Forest Act s94(4) where dealing illegal; Ownership immaterial when statutory conditions for dealing not met.
|
24 June 2016 |
|
Non-compliance with s.362(1) (absence of proceedings' copy) warrants striking out an appeal.
Criminal Procedure Act s.362(1) – mandatory requirement that a petition of appeal be accompanied by a copy of proceedings, judgment or order – non-compliance renders appeal liable to be struck out – inability to obtain copy not an automatic excuse for non-compliance.
|
19 June 2016 |
|
Bank unjustifiably refused to credit plaintiff's duly issued cheque; plaintiff awarded cheque amount, damages and costs.
* Bills of Exchange/cheque law – holder in due course presumption under s.30(2) – bank liability where cheque is duly issued and accepted; burden shifts to party alleging fraud.* Evidence – burden of proof s.115 Evidence Act: party alleging facts especially within its knowledge must prove them.* Bank duties – obligation to return or notify payee if payment countermanded; retention without notice unjustified.* Mistaken payment/counter-claim – bank claiming refund must prove mistake and adduce evidence; failure to prosecute or join drawer undermines counter-claim.
|
10 June 2016 |
| May 2016 |
|
|
Plaintiff failed to prove forged withdrawals or authentic bank statements; bank not negligent and suit dismissed.
Banker-customer relationship; admissibility and proof of banker’s books (s.78 Evidence Act); burden and standard of proof for alleged forgery/fraud; failure to call material witness (adverse inference); negligence in account management; proof of loss.
|
31 May 2016 |
|
Recusal refused where allegations of bias rested on adverse rulings and apparent delaying tactics, not evidence of personal prejudice.
* Judicial disqualification – recusal – adverse rulings alone do not establish bias – need for evidence of personal animosity, friendship or extraneous considerations; * Two approaches to recusal: duty to sit absent proven prejudice vs. discretionary recusal to maintain confidence; * Conduct amounting to delaying tactics may justify refusal to recuse.
|
27 May 2016 |
|
Revision dismissed: CMA jurisdictional ruling was interlocutory and not revisable; matter remitted to CMA.
* Labour procedure – interlocutory rulings – Rule 50 Labour Court Rules – interlocutory CMA rulings are not revisable unless they finally determine the dispute. * Arbitration/CMA – distinction between ruling (interlocutory decision) and award (final determination) – revisability only of awards or rulings that conclude proceedings. * High Court intervention in interlocutory proceedings limited to exceptional cases: inability to obtain justice otherwise, gross irregularity, or grave injustice.
|
27 May 2016 |
|
Whether a cautioned statement was lawfully taken, voluntary and admissible despite delay and subsequent repudiation.
* Criminal procedure – cautioned statement – admissibility – voluntariness – trial within trial to determine voluntariness.
* Criminal Procedure Act – sections 50, 50(2), 51 – computing the four-hour interview period and exclusions for acts related to investigation (defecation of swallowed pellets; conveyance).
* Criminal Procedure Act – section 54 – right to consult lawyer/relative and sufficiency of time.
* Criminal Procedure Act – sections 53, 57, 58 – distinction between interview statements and volunteered cautioned statements; adequacy of caution.
|
15 May 2016 |
|
Statutory rape conviction quashed because the prosecution failed to prove the victim's age, a mandatory element.
Criminal law – Statutory rape (s.130(2)(e)) – Proof of victim’s age is mandatory; citation in charge sheet or magistrate’s remark is not evidence; evidence required to be positively laid out; medical evidence and confessions do not substitute for proof of age.
|
3 May 2016 |
| April 2016 |
|
|
Conviction based on dock identification without an identification parade is unsafe; appellant acquitted and released.
Criminal law – armed robbery; Visual identification – evidence of the weakest kind; Dock identification without an identification parade is of little evidential value; Identification parade and contemporaneous description to police essential; Trial judgment must state prosecution proved case beyond reasonable doubt and make an explicit finding of guilt.
|
25 April 2016 |
|
An employer may recover losses from an employee for negligent breach of contractual duties causing quantified loss.
Employment law – breach of contractual duties by employee – employer’s right to recover losses caused by negligent/wrongful performance; proof in ex parte proceedings; interest and costs awarded.
|
22 April 2016 |
|
Appeal dismissed: Headquarters validly imposed dismissal; no evidence of regional decision, bias, or time-bar breach.
Employment law – disciplinary procedure – jurisdiction of regional disciplinary committee v. headquarters – preliminary investigations and recommendations; TRA Code of Conduct clause 26 – time limits for decisions (date of decision, not date of receipt); allegations of bias – requirement of evidence and inadmissibility of new evidence on appeal; dismissal for non-remittance of public funds.
|
19 April 2016 |
|
Appeal dismissed: Headquarters lawfully dismissed employee within Code time limits; no evidence of regional decision or bias.
Labour law — disciplinary procedure — jurisdiction of regional vs. headquarters disciplinary bodies; admissibility and proof of disciplinary decisions; right to be heard and to appeal; procedural bias — proof required; time limits for disciplinary decisions under employer Code of Conduct (clause 26).
|
19 April 2016 |
|
Conviction quashed where visual identification was unreliable and no ballistic link tied the gun to the scene.
* Criminal law – Visual identification – Single-witness night identification must be approached with caution; failure to name suspect at earliest opportunity undermines reliability. * Forensic evidence – Ballistic/expert opinion required to link firearm exhibits and magazines where such linkage is material to conviction. * Prosecution discretion in calling witnesses – but duty to adduce expert evidence where necessary to establish crucial exhibit connections. * Conviction unsupported by reliable identification and lacking forensic linkage is unsafe and liable to be quashed.
|
11 April 2016 |
|
Appellant’s conviction quashed where victim’s unreliable identification and non-production of material eyewitnesses undermined proof beyond reasonable doubt.
* Criminal law – visual identification – recognition where witness familiar with suspect – reliability and safety of identification evidence.* Criminal procedure – identification parade – unnecessary if witness was familiar with suspect; parade evidence discounted.* Evidence – failure to call material eyewitnesses – adverse inference against the prosecution.* Evidence – witness untruthfulness on material points undermines identification and may render evidence unsafe.* Cautioned statement – weight and admissibility called into question when other evidential defects exist.
|
11 April 2016 |
|
Whether a Primary Court may hear estate administration and limits on admitting new evidence on second appeal.
* Civil procedure – Appeal – Admission of new evidence on second appeal – leave required under Order XXXIX Rule 27.
* Jurisdiction – Primary Court competence in administration of estates – jurisdictional issues may be raised at any stage.
* Succession law – distinction between customary practice and Indian Succession Act/Christian rites in determining Primary Court jurisdiction.
* Administration of estates – duties of administrator – sale of estate property and obligation to account and distribute proceeds.
* Procedural challenge – failure to file inventory/accounts (Forms V and VI) should be raised at trial, not first raised on appeal.
|
8 April 2016 |
|
Police driver and State held vicariously liable for negligent driving; plaintiff awarded Tshs.25,000,000 plus interest.
Motor-vehicle accident – identification of vehicle and driver; vicarious liability of the State/Attorney General for torts of police officer on duty; burden of proof in civil cases; contributory negligence; award of general damages; interest on decretal sum.
|
8 April 2016 |
| March 2016 |
|
|
Conviction for malicious damage quashed for lack of proof of malice and a defective charge omitting essential mens rea.
Criminal law – Malicious damage to property (s.326 Penal Code) – Essential mens rea: willfully and unlawfully – Omission of "willfully and unlawfully" from charge renders indictment defective (s.234 Criminal Procedure Act) – Proof of ownership/identification of cattle – Lack of proof of malice fatal to conviction.
|
21 March 2016 |
|
Court finds marriage‑age provisions discriminatory and directs government to set 18 years for both sexes within one year.
Constitutional law — equality and non‑discrimination — Law of Marriage Act sections 13 & 17 — differentia! marriage ages for girls and boys; parental/guardian and court consent for child marriage; child protection; declaration of unconstitutionality and remedial direction to legislature under Articles 30(5) and 13(2).
|
3 March 2016 |
|
Appeal struck out because the trial court record lacked the required Notice of Appeal, rendering the appeal incompetent.
Criminal procedure – Appeal competency – Requirement of Notice of Appeal in trial court record – Copy attached to memorandum insufficient – Appeal struck out for incompetence.
|
1 March 2016 |
| February 2016 |
|
|
Documents filed on hearing day without court leave after a scheduling order are invalid and are expunged.
* Civil procedure — Scheduling order — Departure requires leave under Order VIII A r4 and satisfaction of Order VIII A r1(2).
* Civil procedure — Late production of documents — Notice to Produce and supplementary list filed on hearing day without leave are invalid.
* Evidence — Section 68 & disclosure — newly disclosed documents cannot be relied upon if filed in breach of scheduling order.
* Remedy — Expungement of improperly filed documents; costs in the course.
|
29 February 2016 |
|
Procedural failures (inadequate voir dire, improper PF3 admission, and unresolved age discrepancy) rendered the trial a nullity and retrial was ordered.
* Criminal procedure – Admission of contested cautioned statement – Inquiry required before admitting a contested confession. * Criminal procedure – PF3 (medical report) – section 240(3) right to summon medical officer must be observed. * Evidence – Child witness – voir dire must establish understanding of oath and duty to tell the truth. * Child law – Discrepancy in age requires amendment of charge or inquiry under section 113 of the Law of the Child Act. * Remedy – Fundamental procedural defects render proceedings a nullity and attract retrial de novo.
|
19 February 2016 |
|
Insufficient evidence of cohabitation and reputation to invoke s.160 presumption of marriage; appeal dismissed with costs.
* Family law – Presumption of marriage under s.160 Law of Marriage Act – elements: cohabitation for two years, reputation as husband and wife, absence of formal marriage – requirement of clear evidence to establish cohabitation and reputation. * Evidence – appellate review – limits on re-evaluating facts except where there is misdirection or non-direction. * Relief – property division and maintenance claims depend on established marital status.
|
11 February 2016 |
|
Confidential replies to a party’s inquiry about a candidate’s trustworthiness were not defamatory; claim dismissed with costs.
Defamation — alleged defamatory letters sent in response to a party inquiry — confidential communications; publication and authorship of circulated defamatory additions; truth and absence of express allegation as defence.
|
8 February 2016 |
|
A defective supporting affidavit and improper jurat render a revision application incompetent and subject to striking out.
Civil procedure – Revision under s.44(1)(b) – Preliminary objections: limitation and defective affidavit; supporting affidavit must correctly identify deponent and jurat must comply with Oaths Act; defective affidavit renders application incompetent and must be struck out (Kisaka authority).
|
1 February 2016 |
| January 2016 |
|
|
Extension of time granted where delay was caused by subordinate court’s failure to supply the drawn order; appealability issue premature.
Law of Limitation Act s.14(1) – extension of time; Civil Procedure Code Order XXXIX r.1(1) – mandatory annexure of judgment/ruling and drawn order; delay caused by failure to supply drawn order constitutes sufficient cause; premature to decide appealability of dismissal of review at extension stage.
|
29 January 2016 |
|
Compliance order under EWURA Act is conclusive and enforceable as an injunction; respondents fined for persistent non-compliance.
* Energy & Water Utilities Regulatory Authority Act – section 39(4), (6): compliance orders enforceable as injunctions and certified certificates conclusive proof. * Non-compliance with regulatory compliance orders – justification for injunctive relief and monetary penalty under section 42(1). * Ex parte proceedings – appropriate where respondents are duly served but fail to appear.
|
29 January 2016 |
|
Reported
Late-filed notice to produce and supplementary documents without leave were expunged for contravening scheduling-order rules.
Civil procedure – pre-trial scheduling order – Order VIIIA r.4 and Order VIII r.1(1) – filing documents on hearing day requires leave – late notice to produce and supplementary list expunged; Evidence Act s.68 citation insufficient for late filing.
|
29 January 2016 |
|
Applicant enforced a certified EWURA compliance order by injunction and fine; the land‑execution leave issue was identified but ruling not provided.
* Civil procedure – Order XXII Rule 3(1) CPC – succession of deceased plaintiff/objector and requirement to obtain leave before being made a party to pending proceedings (issue identified).
* Administrative/Regulatory enforcement – EWURA Act, s.39(1)–(6) and s.42(1) – certified compliance orders are conclusive and enforceable as injunctions; non‑compliance permits High Court injunctive relief and fines.
* Evidence/procedure – failure to oppose enforcement where service proved supports grant of relief.
|
29 January 2016 |
|
High Court certified three legal issues and granted leave to appeal concerning sale and administration of estate property.
* Appellate procedure – Certification of point of law and leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal – limited role of High Court to ascertain existence of points of law. * Estate administration – whether Primary Court may order sale of property alleged to have been previously sold. * Administrator’s powers – propriety of court interference while an appointed administrator’s duties continue. * Timing in estate distribution – whether sale orders should account for time between appointment and distribution.
|
28 January 2016 |