Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

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

Visit website

https://jmap.judiciary.go.tz/jmap/jmap-hc

3 judgments

Advanced search

Court registries

All years

All months

Sort by:

3 judgments

Citation	Judgment date
September 2006
Ezbon Charles Okong'o vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 140 of 2005) [2006] TZHC 249 (29 September 2006) Conviction quashed where trial court failed to evaluate defence and no forensic link tied the appellant to the semen. * Criminal law – Rape – Proof beyond reasonable doubt – Distinction between proof of sexual intercourse and proof of identity of perpetrator. * Criminal procedure – Evaluation of evidence – Trial court must assess defence evidence together with prosecution case. * Forensic evidence – Presence of spermatozoa without DNA linkage insufficient to identify accused. * Appeal – Conviction quashed where reasonable doubt as to who committed the offence.	29 September 2006
Fatu Ausi vs Subira Mohamed (PC. Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2005) [2006] TZHC 291 (8 September 2006) An extension of time to appeal requires good reasons and prospects of success; procedural defects and unproven claims justify dismissal. * Civil procedure – extension of time to appeal – applicant must show sufficient and good reasons for delay and prospects of success. * Appeal procedure – appeals must be properly framed to challenge the decision under attack; defective memorandum may dispose of appeal. * Evidence – allegations of procedural assistance must be raised and supported by evidence to justify delay.	8 September 2006
Selemani Nasoro vs Republic (Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 2006) [2006] TZHC 184 (1 September 2006) Appeal allowed: rape conviction quashed due to witness contradictions, inadequate identification and insufficient medical evidence. Criminal law — Rape — Standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt; Identification — visual ID at dusk and insufficient lighting; Credibility — contradictions between prosecution witnesses; Medical evidence — PF.3 findings unsupported by scientific basis; Victim testimony — refusal to testify and absence of medical proof of epilepsy; Conviction quashed for insufficient evidence.	1 September 2006

1