|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2020 |
|
|
Failure to record a child witness's mandatory promise to tell the truth vitiates the evidence and quashes the conviction.
Evidence — Child witness (tender years) — 2016 amendment to section 127 requires child to promise to tell the truth and for that promise to be recorded; non-compliance vitiates evidence and may require expungement. Criminal procedure — retrial — retrial discretionary; ordered only when interests of justice require it. Criminal law — burden of proof — conviction must rest on strength of prosecution evidence.
|
23 December 2020 |
|
Applicant granted 45 days to appeal after court found delay was technical and sufficiently explained.
* Land law – Extension of time to file appeal under section 41(2) Land Disputes Courts Act – requirement to show "good/sufficient cause" – discretion of the court. * Accounting for delay – technical delay due to court procedures and previous struck-out appeal not attributable to applicant’s negligence. * Prejudice – absence of demonstrated prejudice to respondents relevant to exercise of discretion.
|
23 December 2020 |
|
Claimant failed to prove increased market value of an exhibit; custody of the exhibit remained with the trial court, not the respondent.
* Civil procedure – burden of proof – claimant must prove facts establishing claim on balance of probabilities; mere assertion of value insufficient.
* Evidence – valuation of property – necessity of supporting evidence for claimed market value.
* Custody of exhibits – where an item is tendered and marked in criminal proceedings it remains in court custody; possession claims must be pursued against the trial court, not a party.
* Applicable rule – Magistrate's Court (Rules of Evidence in Primary Courts) GN. No. 66 of 1972, Rule 1(2).
|
23 December 2020 |
|
Denial of cross-examination after a change of magistrate violated the appellant’s right to be heard; retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – right to be heard – failure to restart hearing after magistrate's disqualification; denial of opportunity to cross-examine witness; Evidence Act amendment permitting testimony by teleconference/video conference; retrial ordered where proceedings are irregular and unfair.
|
23 December 2020 |
|
Applicant failed to show good cause for extension of time; delay unexplained and ignorance of law insufficient.
Extension of time – discretionary exercise requiring good cause; applicant must account for each day of delay; ignorance of law/unrepresented not good cause; no mandatory requirement to attach Primary Court proceedings for appeal to High Court; illegality may justify extension only if apparent on the face of the record.
|
22 December 2020 |
|
Conviction quashed for insufficient proof and procedural irregularities; improperly admitted exhibits expunged, no retrial ordered.
Criminal law – Theft – Identification and proof of ownership – Complainant must testify or admissible evidence must establish ownership; Improperly admitted documents not read out must be expunged; Extraneous matter by trial court vitiates proceedings; Retrial not ordered where prosecution evidence is patently weak and ordering retrial would prejudice the accused.
|
22 December 2020 |
|
Second appeal dismissed: marriage found irreparably broken; custody decided by children’s best interests; asset division upheld.
Family law — Divorce — Whether marriage broken beyond repair (s.107 Law of Marriage Act) — Cruelty as ground for divorce; Custody — Best interests of the child (s.125) — schooling children to remain with primary caregiver; Matrimonial property — Division based on evidence of acquisition and joint development; Second appeal — Limited to questions of law; concurrent factual findings not disturbed absent misdirection or misapprehension.
|
21 December 2020 |
|
High Court restored Primary Court conviction for malicious damage, finding the first appellate court misdirected on witness credibility and awarding compensation.
Criminal law – Malicious damage to property – Evaluation of eyewitness evidence and credibility – Appellate interference with trial court’s assessment of witnesses – Distinction between criminal damage and land dispute – Compensation for destroyed crops.
|
21 December 2020 |
|
High Court refused a s.47(3) certificate because the applicant’s grounds were factual, not points of law.
Land Disputes Courts Act s.47(3) – Certification for appeals from Ward Tribunal – High Court’s exclusive jurisdiction to certify – Distinction between point of law and question of fact – Requirement that issues be legal, not factual, to warrant certificate.
|
18 December 2020 |
|
Extension granted for late appeal where prior technical delay excused and alleged illegality not apparent on record.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Applicant must show sufficient cause; discretion exercised judiciously. * Illegality — Must be apparent on face of record to justify extension. * Technical delay — Period during which an appeal is pending but later struck out may be excusable. * Promptness and prejudice — Delay, diligence and lack of prejudice weighed in granting extension.
|
17 December 2020 |
|
Appeal against grant of letters of administration dismissed: absent co-appellant waived hearing; magistrate name discrepancy was clerical.
* Probate – Revocation of letters of administration – Competency of trial proceedings – Appellate obligation to address illegality before merits.
* Procedural fairness – Right to be heard – Absence of co-appellant and waiver of right where prosecution case closed by present co-appellant.
* Judicial conduct – Alleged change of magistrate – Typographical error versus substantive change – signatures/handwritten record as evidence.
|
16 December 2020 |
|
Extension of time granted for appeal after technical delay from filing notice in wrong court registry.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to file notice of intention to appeal and lodge appeal – technical delay where notice filed in High Court instead of trial subordinate court – Section 361(1)(a) Criminal Procedure Act, Cap. 20 R.E. 2019 – prosecutorial support relevant.
|
15 December 2020 |
|
Applicants charged with economic offences granted bail subject to statutory high-value deposits, sureties and reporting conditions.
* Criminal procedure – Bail — Bail pending trial under Economic and Organised Crime Control Act — application of section 36(5)(a–d) for offences exceeding T.shs.10,000,000.
* Evidence – Documentary evidence — inadmissibility of photocopied medical records under section 66 of the Evidence Act unless secondary evidence rules satisfied.
* Public interest and administration of justice — assessment of risk of interference with investigations when granting bail.
* Bail conditions — monetary deposits or immovable property, resident sureties with bonds, surrender of travel documents, reporting and jurisdictional restrictions.
|
15 December 2020 |
|
Where an economic-crime charge lacks a stated value and committal is pending, the district court, not the High Court, has bail jurisdiction.
* Economic and Organised Crime Control Act – bail jurisdiction – interplay of s.29(4)(a),(b) and s.36(1).
* Pre-committal bail – subordinate court jurisdiction where value does not exceed TSh 10,000,000.
* Unstated monetary value in charge treated as below TSh 10,000,000 for jurisdictional purposes.
|
15 December 2020 |
|
Bail pending trial granted for EOCCA wildlife-trophy offences subject to statutory conditions including half-value deposit and two resident sureties.
* Criminal procedure – Bail pending trial under the Economic and Organised Crime Control Act – Applicability of sections 36(5) & (6) where alleged value exceeds T.shs.10,000,000.- * Bail conditions – deposit of half the alleged value or immovable property, resident sureties with bonds, surrender of travel documents, territorial restriction and reporting obligations – verification by presiding Resident Magistrate.
|
15 December 2020 |
|
Failure to have assessors give opinion in open court renders DLHT proceedings and judgment a nullity.
Land Disputes Courts Act s.23(1)&(2) and GN. No.174/2003 reg.19(2) – requirement for assessors to give opinion in open court; written assessor opinions in file insufficient; failure to procure/verbalize assessor opinions vitiates DLHT proceedings and judgment; omission goes to root of matter and renders decision a nullity.
|
15 December 2020 |
|
Extension of time granted where DLHT proceedings were fatally irregular for failing to invite or record assessors' opinions.
* Civil procedure — Extension of time — Good cause required — Established illegality in lower tribunal proceedings can constitute sufficient cause.
* Land Disputes Courts — Assessors — Mandatory requirement to have assessors give opinion in presence of parties and to record/read opinions — Failure is fatal to proceedings (s.23(2) Cap.216; Reg.19(2)).
* Appeal procedure — Technical delay due to struck-out appeal — immaterial where fatal illegality is shown.
|
15 December 2020 |
|
A DLHT judgment is a nullity where the chairman fails to require, record and read assessors' opinions before judgment.
Land procedure – District Land and Housing Tribunal – assessors' participation – requirement under s.23(2) LADCA to require, record and read assessors' opinions before judgment; s.24 LADCA – chairman to consider and give reasons for departure; failure to obtain or record assessors' opinions is a fundamental irregularity and renders the decision a nullity; precedents – Edina Adam Kibona, Ameir Mbarak, Chadiel Mduma.
|
15 December 2020 |
|
Extension of time to appeal refused where applicant failed to account for delay and did not produce relevant judgments or dates.
Criminal procedure – Extension of time to appeal – Applicant must account for each day of delay and attach relevant judgments/records; new factual claims made in rejoinder are inadmissible; time for appeal where file remitted runs from date of proper conviction.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
A certificate of registration under ELRA gives a trade union locus standi; misnaming the High Court in title was not fatal.
* Labour law – registration of trade unions – Sections 46–49, ELRA – certificate of registration confers legal personality and locus standi.
* Corporate personality – requirement to register trustees under Trustees Incorporation Act not implied by ELRA registration.
* Civil procedure – preliminary objection – improper citation of court’s name not fatal where title sufficiently identifies the United Republic and labour rules apply.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
A date discrepancy on a decree is a clerical error curable under section 96 and overriding objective; the appeal is not struck out.
Civil procedure — Decree must bear the date of judgment (Order XX r.7 CPC) — Date discrepancy between judgment and decree — Clerical error curable under section 96 CPC — Principle of overriding objective (secs.3A,3B CPC) — Appeal competence — Preliminary objection overruled.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
An application filed under a repealed statute is incompetent and is properly struck out; re-filing within 21 days permitted.
* Criminal procedure – application for extension of time – competence of proceedings – correct citation of statute; repealed law renders application incompetent and non-justiciable.
* Jurisdiction – courts must determine competence before hearing merits – incompetent proceedings to be struck out.
* Procedural compliance – ignorance of revised legislation does not excuse defective filing.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
An application filed under a repealed statute is incompetent and is struck out, but the applicant may refile within 21 days.
Criminal procedure – competence of applications – incorrect citation of repealed statute (Cap 20 [R.E.2002] v Cap 20 [R.E.2019]) – non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements renders application incompetent and a nullity; court must determine competence first; defective application struck out with leave to refile within specified time.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
An application citing a repealed edition of the Criminal Procedure Act was held incompetent and struck out, with leave to refile within 21 days.
Criminal procedure – competence of applications – citation of repealed versus current revised edition of statute; jurisdiction – courts cannot entertain incompetent proceedings; remedy – striking out and leave to re‑file; ignorance of law no excuse.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
An application filed under a repealed statutory provision is incompetent and struck out; applicant may refile within 21 days.
* Criminal procedure – application for extension of time – competence – filing under repealed statutory provision – incompetence and striking out.
* Jurisdiction – courts must first determine competence before dealing with merits; no jurisdiction to entertain incompetent proceedings.
* Procedural compliance – mandatory citation requirements; ignorance of revised statute is not a defence.
* Remedy – striking out incompetent application; liberty to re-file within a fixed period.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal against a decision by an SRMEJ; matter to be transferred to the appropriate RM with extended jurisdiction.
Land procedure – jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal to Court of Appeal – decision made by Senior Resident Magistrate with Extended Jurisdiction – competency of application filed in High Court – transfer to Resident Magistrate with extended jurisdiction; costs in the course.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
Application for extension of time struck out as incompetent for citing a repealed statute; leave given to refile within 21 days.
Criminal procedure — competence of proceedings; incorrect citation of statute; filing under repealed law (Cap.20 R.E.2002 v R.E.2019); jurisdiction to entertain only competent applications; striking out defective applications; leave to refile within fixed time.
|
14 December 2020 |
|
Delay in obtaining judgment copies and alleged jurisdictional illegality justified extension of time to appeal.
* Civil procedure – extension of time – delay in obtaining judgment copies as sufficient cause; illegality affecting tribunal's jurisdiction as additional ground for extension.
|
11 December 2020 |
|
Court: mortgage valid and guarantor liable, but bank’s sale was premature without written notice to borrower; guarantors share liability.
Land law – mortgage and sale of mortgaged land – statutory notice requirement under Land Act; Contract and suretyship – guarantor liability coextensive with principal debtor; Non est factum – must be pleaded and requires fundamental difference; Company/group v. office-bearers – officers signing for association not personally liable without separate agreement; Remedies – auction of third-party mortgaged property premature without notice to borrower.
|
10 December 2020 |
|
Applicant's bail denied because money laundering is statutorily unbailable regardless of amount.
* Bail – money laundering – section 148(5)(a)(v) Criminal Procedure Act – money laundering is statutorily unbailable; amount involved immaterial; prior unproduced decisions not binding.
|
8 December 2020 |
|
Bail pending appeal refused due to serious fraud, large sum involved and real risk of absconding.
Criminal procedure – Bail pending appeal – Bailable offence; judicial discretion; seriousness of offence and sentence; likelihood to abscond; failure to show overwhelming prospects of success on appeal.
|
8 December 2020 |
|
Applicant in custody granted 21-day extension to file appeal due to prison-related delay and sufficient cause.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to file appeal – sufficient/good cause – delays due to prison procedures and inability to obtain records – discretion of court guided by established authorities.
|
7 December 2020 |
|
Appeal filed outside the extended period, unsupported delay explanation, found incompetent and struck out.
Criminal procedure — extension of time to appeal — computation of time and availability of court records — unexplained or unsubstantiated delay — competency of appeal — striking out appeal.
|
7 December 2020 |
|
Prisoner’s transfer and prior time‑barred appeal amounted to good cause to extend time to file notice and appeal.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to file notice of appeal and appeal – good cause – prisoner transfer and difficulty obtaining record – technical delay principle – discretion of court.
|
7 December 2020 |
|
Court granted extension to appeal, finding the applicants' prison-related delay and explanations constituted sufficient cause.
Criminal procedure – extension of time to appeal – sufficient/good cause – factors: promptness, explanation, diligence – prisoner’s incarceration as cause – case law: Tanroads v. Ruaha Concrete; Tanga Cement; Mobrama Gold.
|
7 December 2020 |
|
Court granted extension to file appeal, finding prison-related delay and inability to obtain records constituted sufficient cause.
* Criminal procedure – Extension of time – Applicants in custody – Delay due to prison procedures and failure to obtain copies – Whether such delay constitutes sufficient/good cause – Application of Court of Appeal test in Regional Manager, TANROADS Kagera v. Ruaha Concrete Co. Ltd.
|
7 December 2020 |
|
Doctrine of recent possession upheld where accused found with registered motorcycle and failed to satisfactorily explain possession.
* Criminal law – Burglary and theft – Doctrine of recent possession – Conditions for invocation and rebuttal by accused; identification of stolen property by registration card and exhibits; failure to cross-examine as acceptance of ownership evidence. * Evidence – Weight over number of witnesses; search record and possession as corroboration.
|
1 December 2020 |
| November 2020 |
|
|
Applicant failed to show illegality or sufficient reasons for extension of time; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land – Extension of time to appeal – Allegation of illegality as ground for extension – Attendance at initial hearing and subsequent voluntary absence – Duty to account for delay – Ward tribunal proceedings and service of summons.
|
27 November 2020 |
|
Failure to require, record or read assessors' opinions at DLHT vitiates proceedings and renders the judgment a nullity.
* Land law – appellate procedure before DLHT – requirement that assessors give opinions in court and such opinions be recorded and read out at conclusion of hearing (s.23 LADCA and Reg.19(2) GN. No.174/2003).
* Evidence/procedure – absence of an assessor for part of proceedings means no full participation; written opinion off-record does not satisfy legal requirement.
* Procedural fairness – failure to obtain recorded assessor opinions goes to the root of the trial and renders judgment a nullity.
* Remedy – quashing of DLHT proceedings and judgment and ordering rehearing before a different chairman and assessors.
|
27 November 2020 |
|
Interim injunction refused where alleged loss was compensable by damages, failing the cumulative Atilio test.
* Civil procedure – Interim injunction – Application considered under Atilio v Mbowe threefold test (prima facie case; irreparable injury; balance of convenience) – Conditions are cumulative.
* Interim relief – Irreparable loss – Loss compensable by monetary damages does not qualify as irreparable where claim for compensation exists.
* Land disputes – Allegation of road reserve/trespass – entitlement to compensation and interim protection considered.
|
27 November 2020 |
|
Conviction based on an equivocal plea—due to procedural failures in recording plea and exhibits—was quashed and retrial ordered.
Criminal procedure – Plea of guilty – Requirement that plea be unequivocal – Charge, ingredients, facts and exhibits must be read and explained to accused – Failure to follow procedure renders plea equivocal and conviction appealable – Equivocal plea vitiates proceedings and justifies quashment and retrial.
|
26 November 2020 |
|
Applicant lacked locus standi; proceedings were a nullity and courts must raise jurisdictional issues suo motu.
* Civil procedure – Locus standi – Plaintiff lacking title or mandate to sue renders proceedings a nullity; court’s duty to raise jurisdictional issues suo motu.
* Parties – Necessary/real party in interest – True owner must be plaintiff where contract was with owner; witness cannot validly replace plaintiff.
* Appeal – Appellate court may raise and decide jurisdictional issues at any stage; failure by lower courts to determine locus standi is fatal.
|
26 November 2020 |
|
Extension of time refused where tribunal record showed decree certified earlier and alleged illegality was unproven.
* Land procedure – Extension of time to appeal – applicant must show sufficient cause; court exercises discretion judiciously.
* Court records – presumption of authenticity; records not lightly impeached; affidavit/evidence needed to contradict court record.
* Time computation – date of certification/extraction of judgment/decree governs time for appeal, not date of collection.
* Assessors – opinion must be read/availed to parties; allegation of non-reading must be shown on record.
|
26 November 2020 |
|
Applicant's suit struck out for failing to state the value of disputed land required for court jurisdiction.
Civil Procedure — Order VII r.1(e) (cause of action and when it arose); Order VII r.1(i) (statement of value of subject matter for jurisdiction and court fees); Land Disputes Courts Act s.37(1)(a) & (b) — High Court jurisdiction for recovery of immovable property and pecuniary claims; Limitation — 12 years for land actions; Failure to state value of land renders plaint incompetent and divests court of ascertained jurisdiction.
|
26 November 2020 |
|
Failure to give adequate retrenchment notice and involve the trade union made the termination unfair; minimum 12 months' compensation mandatory.
Labour law – Retrenchment procedure – Employer's duty to give timely notice and consult registered trade union under s.38(1) ELRA and Code of Good Practice; Procedural unfairness where trade union not involved; Compensation for unfair termination – s.40(1)(c) ELRA prescribes minimum twelve months' remuneration; Civil procedure – dismissal for want of prosecution where party fails to comply with court-ordered filing timetable.
|
26 November 2020 |
|
Revision dismissed; CMA’s finding of unfair termination and compensation award upheld as timely and regular.
* Labour law – limitation period for lodging complaints at CMA – whether claim was time-barred under Rules (GN No.64/2007).
* Labour law – unfair/constructive termination – employer's burden under section 37(2).
* Remedies for unfair termination – discretionary reliefs under section 40(1): reinstatement, re‑engagement, or compensation.
* Procedural and substantive fairness – applicability of Rule 32 of GN No.67/2007 and arbitrator’s discretionary power.
|
25 November 2020 |
|
Appeal struck out because the memorandum omitted the correct decree; defective decree rendered the appeal incompetent.
Land law — Appeal procedure — appeal must be against a proper decree — Order XXXIX r.1(1), Order XX r.6(1) CPC — defective/inconsistent decree attached to memorandum of appeal renders appeal incompetent — overriding objective cannot cure a non-existing appeal — remedy: strike out and seek rectification at trial tribunal.
|
25 November 2020 |
|
Leave application struck out for non‑joinder as university’s legal personality was not established; counsel’s representation was proper.
Administrative law – judicial review leave application – party‑status and necessary parties; procedural competence – necessity to establish legal personality before suing an institution; advocates as witnesses – regulation 96 GN No.118/2018 permits representation unless advocate must later give evidence, in which case withdrawal is required; affidavit evidence – hearsay objection raised but not finally determined.
|
25 November 2020 |
|
High Court sitting on an extension application exercises original jurisdiction; leave under amended section 47(2) not required, application dismissed.
Land law; procedure — application for extension of time — High Court sits in original jurisdiction when hearing extension applications; section 47(2) (as amended 2018) — leave to appeal to Court of Appeal required only where High Court exercised appellate or revisional jurisdiction; struck-out appeal treated as no appeal filed.
|
25 November 2020 |
|
Accused acquitted because night identification and the dying declaration were unreliable and uncorroborated.
Criminal law — Visual identification at night — need for detailed description of light and observation; Dying declaration — requires material corroboration; Conduct after offence — weight of attendance at scene and readiness to submit to inquiry; Failure to mention accused early — affects credibility.
|
24 November 2020 |