|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| May 2025 |
|
|
Whether a petition challenging an arbitral award was time‑barred despite the court’s express leave and deadline to file.
Arbitration — challenge to arbitral award — limitation and extension of time — effect of court granting leave with a specific filing deadline — compliance with court orders — distinction from cases where leave was not expressly granted.
|
30 May 2025 |
|
Counterclaim struck out for failing to state when the cause of action arose, in breach of Order VII, Rule 1(e) CPC, with costs.
Civil procedure – counterclaim – mandatory particulars – Order VII, Rule 1(e) CPC requires statement of when cause of action arose; omission is fatal and justifies striking out. Procedural irregularities – preliminary objection must specify grounds raised; new matters not disclosed in notice may not be entertained. Remedy – omission of date of cause of action warrants striking out rather than amendment in the circumstances.
|
30 May 2025 |
|
Extension of time granted where applicant alleged arbitral award illegality and respondent did not contest factual averments.
Extension of time – Limitation Act s.14 – Lyamuya test – failure to file counter‑affidavit concedes factual allegations – illegality in arbitral award as sufficient ground to extend time – Arbitration Act time limits noted.
|
30 May 2025 |
|
Extension of time granted to challenge arbitral award due to alleged illegality in the unilateral appointment of arbitrator.
Arbitration – Application for extension of time – Sufficient cause – Apparent illegality – Unilateral appointment of arbitrator contrary to agreement – Composition of arbitral tribunal – Contradictory arbitral orders – Commercial contracts and diplomatic immunity – Law of Limitation Act s.14(1); Arbitration Act ss. 21, 34, 74, 77.
|
30 May 2025 |
|
Court allowed plaintiff to withdraw suit, vacated default-judgment pursuit, granted leave to refile and half-fee exemption.
Civil procedure – withdrawal of suit after order to pursue default judgment – vacating default-judgment pursuit order; withdrawal with leave to refile; costs; partial filing-fee exemption under Court Fees Rules GN 247/2018 Rule 6.
|
27 May 2025 |
|
Application to lift corporate veil dismissed as court was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to re-decide the same issue.
Company law – lifting the corporate veil – application to make company directors personally liable for a judgment debt; Civil procedure – functus officio – court lacks jurisdiction to re-determine issues finally decided in earlier proceedings; Execution – remedy alleged failure to satisfy decree cannot be pursued by re‑opening a previously dismissed application; Procedural – substituted service and ex parte hearing; no order as to costs.
|
26 May 2025 |
|
Application for stay of execution dismissed as overtaken by events after execution dismissal and extension granted.
Civil procedure – stay of execution – application for stay pending determination of extension of time to lodge appeal – overtaken by events where execution dismissed and extension granted – court declines to decide inter-judge stay power.
|
23 May 2025 |
|
Review dismissed: alleged errors were not apparent on the record and raised issues for appeal rather than review.
Civil procedure – Review – scope limited to obvious errors on face of record; Limitation Act s.14 – extension of time may be sought before or after expiry but requires sufficient reasons; Computation of time for setting aside dismissal orders; Attempted/rejected online filings are not court records for review; Lyamuya principles on delay are matters for consideration but do not convert appeal issues into reviewable errors.
|
23 May 2025 |
|
The applicant failed to prove Order XXI r39(2) conditions; a respondent cannot represent other natural respondents without authorization.
Execution — Arrest and detention of judgment debtors — Order XXI r.39(2) Civil Procedure Code — executing court must be satisfied of fiduciary obligation, concealment/transfer, undue preference, refusal to pay despite means, or likelihood of absconding before committal; Representation — a natural person cannot be represented in a show-cause affidavit by another natural person without formal authorization; Stay of execution — once notice of appeal is lodged only the Court of Appeal can grant stay; High Court functus officio on matters already decided.
|
23 May 2025 |
|
Unauthorized commercial use of an individual's image warrants compensation; quantum reduced where proof of actual loss is weak.
Image rights – unauthorized commercial use of photographs – entitlement to compensation despite limited proof of actual loss. Damages – general damages for misuse of image – quantum depends on facts and evidential proof; excessive awards liable to reduction. Evidence – third‑party advertising agreement does not substitute for subject's consent. Relief – injunction against further use and joint and several liability for damages and costs.
|
23 May 2025 |
|
Extension denied where substituted service by publication was effective and applicant failed to show sufficient cause.
Extension of time – Limitation Act s.14(1) – applicant must show sufficient cause and account for each day of delay; Substituted service by publication – Order V Rule 16 CPC – effectual as personal service; Alleged illegality and denial of audi alteram partem – not apparent on face of record; Functus officio – court will not revisit matters already determined by order for substituted service.
|
23 May 2025 |
|
Default judgment refused where the plaintiff failed to prove existence of a required written international sale contract.
Commercial law – Default judgment under Rule 22 – procedural compliance vs substantive proof; burden of proof on plaintiff; Sale of Goods Act – international sale between corporations should be in writing; Evidence Act – preponderance of probabilities required.
|
23 May 2025 |
|
Post‑contract adjudication does not activate a contractual 28‑day arbitration deadline; statutory limitation governs post‑contract arbitration.
Construction law – adjudication as interim binding remedy during contract; referral to arbitration is a fresh submission not an appeal; intra‑contract 28‑day deadlines apply only during the contract life; post‑contract arbitration governed by Law of Limitation Act; court declines unnecessary extension of time.
|
23 May 2025 |
|
Court entered consent judgment enforcing settlement requiring the respondent to pay TZS 203,545,321.89 in two instalments.
Commercial law - consent judgment - Deed of Settlement enforced as court decree - payment schedule - abandonment of other claims - execution on default - costs each party.
|
21 May 2025 |
|
Action against bank for wrongful LC payment struck out for non-joinder despite res judicata objection failing.
Commercial law – Letters of Credit – wrongful honour and bank liability; Civil procedure – preliminary objections – res judicata requires identity of parties and cause of action; Civil procedure – necessary parties/non-joinder – beneficiary, receiving bank and interested procurement agency may be indispensable for complete and executable relief; Striking out for non-joinder; Interaction between arbitration awards and subsequent suits against banks.
|
16 May 2025 |
|
An application under section 51 of the Arbitration Act must be filed by petition; chamber summons is incompetent.
Arbitration Act, s.51 — mode of instituting applications; Regulation 63(1)(a) mandatory requirement for petitions. Procedure — petition versus chamber summons — distinct originating processes; chamber summons not substitute for petition. Overriding objective — cannot be used to circumvent mandatory procedural rules. Filing deadlines — compliance with court scheduling orders; consequences of non‑compliance.
|
16 May 2025 |
|
Applicant granted 30 days to file notice of appeal where court’s administrative error caused an incompetent appeal.
Appellate procedure — extension of time under section 11(1) AJA; defective certificate of delay; administrative error by court officers; sufficient cause evaluated on all circumstances; litigant not to be punished for court’s mistake.
|
16 May 2025 |
|
An Order XXI Rule 88 application is not maintainable after the executing court confirms sale and issues a certificate of sale.
Civil procedure — Execution of decree — Sale by public auction — Order XXI Rules 88, 90 and 92 CPC — Confirmation of sale makes sale absolute; 30‑day limitation to apply to set aside for material irregularity or fraud. Execution law — Certificate of sale and transfer of title — confirmation is judicial determination barring subsequent Rule 88 challenges by affected judgment-debtors. Land law — Forced‑sale/market value and bona fide purchaser protections; exception where fraud, collusion or dishonest conduct proved.
|
16 May 2025 |
|
Court extended the commercial case six months, dismissing time‑bar and verification preliminary objections.
Commercial Court — Rule 32 (speed track) — extension of life span of commercial case — discretion to extend even after expiry where sufficient reasons shown. Civil procedure — preliminary objections — must raise a pure point of law (Mukisa test); mixed fact-law objections dismissed. Evidence — verification of affidavits — signature in verification clause required; court to examine the affidavit on file. Case management — interlocutory applications and appeals may justify enlargement of speed track.
|
16 May 2025 |
|
Default judgment entered where plaintiff proved indebtedness and service by publication; defendants jointly and severally liable with interest and costs.
Commercial law – Default judgment under Rule 22 – Proof of service by publication; Evidence – affidavit and annexed loan/security documents to establish indebtedness; Remedies – joint and several liability for unpaid loan; Interest – pleading/proof of interest and court’s discretion to award post-judgment interest.
|
15 May 2025 |
|
Respondent to pay TZS 70,000,000 in two instalments under a consent decree recorded under Order XXIII r.3.
Civil Procedure — Consent decree — Order XXIII r.3 — Written signed compromise recorded in court — Court to record and pass decree; Settlement converted into decretal amount; Counterclaim relinquished; Costs each party to bear own.
|
14 May 2025 |
|
Taxing Officer’s award of TZS 5,000,000 instruction fees upheld as reasonable under 11th Schedule Item 1(d).
Advocates Remuneration Order, 2015 – taxation of costs – applicability of Eleventh Schedule Item 1(d) to petitions under s.233 Companies Act. Instruction fees – reasonableness and quantum – taxing officer’s discretion to award amounts not less than statutory minimum. Evidence at taxation – requirement for receipts/vouchers only when demanded by the taxing officer (Rule 58(1)). Review by reference under Rule 7(1) – challenge to taxing officer’s decision on quantum of costs.
|
13 May 2025 |
|
Preliminary objection of multifariousness dismissed: joinder of defendants severally permitted where common questions of law or fact exist.
Civil procedure – Joinder of parties and causes of action – Order I Rules 1 & 3 and Order II Rule 3 – multifariousness/misjoinder – preliminary objection – Mukisa test – power to strike out or order separate trials.
|
9 May 2025 |
|
Dispute under a refund agreement was held to fall within the MoU's broad arbitration clause and was referred to arbitration; each party to bear own costs.
Contract; Arbitration clause scope – broad‑form clause "in connection with" captures disputes arising from subsequent settlement/refund agreement; Refund agreement construed as interrelated with Memorandum of Understanding; Court's inherent power to refer parties to arbitration absent formal section 14 application; Stay under s.15 Arbitration Act not appropriate where matter has been referred to arbitration.
|
9 May 2025 |
|
High Court loses jurisdiction to determine a review once substantially identical proceedings are pending before the Court of Appeal.
• Civil procedure – jurisdiction – effect of pending proceedings in the Court of Appeal – High Court ceases to have jurisdiction once Court of Appeal is seised of the same subject matter; revision or appeal labels immaterial.
• Civil procedure – review v. revision – substance over form where impugned order is identical.
• Commercial execution – interlocutory relief affected by appellate proceedings.
|
9 May 2025 |
|
Court ordered convening of shareholders' meeting and appointment of the deceased member’s administratrix as director to restore quorum.
Companies Act s.137 – Court-ordered calling and conduct of shareholder meeting – quorum where co-shareholder deceased – appointment of administratrix of estate as director to regularize company affairs – protection of heirs’ interests during voluntary winding up.
|
9 May 2025 |
|
Court ordered convening of a company meeting and appointment of the deceased’s administratrix as director to attain quorum.
Companies Act – s.137 – Court-ordered calling and conduct of company meetings where a director/shareholder has died; appointment of administratrix of deceased’s estate as director to attain quorum; notification to Registrar of Companies.
|
9 May 2025 |
|
A notice of appeal divests the High Court of jurisdiction to tax costs; taxation conducted thereafter is nullified.
Civil procedure – Appeal – Effect of notice of appeal – Filing a notice of appeal divests the High Court (including Taxing Officer) of jurisdiction to tax costs; taxation proceedings conducted after notice of appeal are incompetent and liable to be set aside.
|
9 May 2025 |
|
Court entered consent judgment recording settlement reducing loan to TZS200,000,000; default reinstates full liability and sale.
Civil procedure – Consent judgment – Recording a Deed of Settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC; Settlement terms reducing loan liability; Mortgage discharge upon performance; Reinstatement of original liability and power to sell mortgaged property on default without further court process.
|
5 May 2025 |
|
Court recorded amended settlement as consent judgment, fixing repayment, interest, guarantees and immediate acceleration on default.
Civil procedure – consent judgment – recording and incorporation of an amended deed of settlement under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC. Banking/loan recovery – settlement amount, interest rate and structured repayment schedule. Security and guarantees – irrevocable guarantee by guarantor and continuation of existing personal guarantees. Default and acceleration – missed instalment triggers immediate liability of guarantor without further proceedings or notice.
|
5 May 2025 |
|
Court overruled preliminary objection and granted applicants seven days to file a supplementary affidavit, each party to bear own costs.
Civil procedure — Supplementary affidavit — Leave to file additional evidence before hearing — Discretionary exercise of court’s power — Preliminary objection must raise a pure point of law, not disputed facts — Right to be heard — Parties bound by pleadings but may be permitted to add clarifying evidence.
|
2 May 2025 |
|
Execution of a monetary decree stayed pending resolution of related court applications.
Civil procedure - execution of decrees - stay of execution pending court applications - sufficient cause for halting execution
|
2 May 2025 |
|
High Court dismisses applicants' extension application: notice of appeal was timely; requests for certified copies must be sought in the Court of Appeal.
Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.11(1) – extension of time to file notice of appeal; distinctness of notice of appeal and application for certified copies. Jurisdiction – High Court lacks jurisdiction to extend time for lodging requests for certified copies intended for Court of Appeal; such applications belong to Court of Appeal. Extension of time – Lyamuya criteria: account for delay, non-inordinate delay, diligence; negligence of prior counsel not sufficient to cure jurisdictional defect.
|
2 May 2025 |
|
Conditional stay lapsed for failure to furnish bank guarantee; execution by attachment and sale of 90% interest in two mining licences ordered.
Execution — conditional stay by Court of Appeal requiring bank guarantee within 60 days — failure to furnish security — lapse of stay — insufficiency of unsubstantiated claims about banks/insurers — pending appeal does not bar execution absent valid stay — attachment and sale of 90% interest in mining licences ordered.
|
2 May 2025 |
|
Court dismissed challenge to Taxing Master’s award of instruction and attendance fees, finding no error in principle.
Taxation of costs – scope of judicial review – interference only where error in principle or manifest excess. Advocates Remuneration Order GN 263/2015 – applicability of Schedules (Ninth, Eleventh, Eighth) in taxing instruction and attendance fees. Instruction fees – discretion to award reasonable percentage based on complexity, time and witnesses. Attendance fees – permissible separate allowance under Eighth Schedule unless agreed to be included in instruction fee.
|
2 May 2025 |
|
Section 233 unfair-prejudice petition dismissed because petitioners were not company members and lacked locus standi.
Companies Act s233 – unfair prejudice petitions limited to company members; definition of "member" (s24) – subscriber or person entered in register of members; promise of shares/equitable expectations do not create statutory membership for s233 standing; locus standi is jurisdictional and may be determined on preliminary objection where pleadings establish non-membership.
|
2 May 2025 |
|
A factual allegation of late service cannot be decided on a preliminary objection; the plaint sufficiently disclosed its value.
Civil procedure Preliminary objection Point must be pure law and not require factual inquiry; submissions are not evidence. Court orders Compliance required but breach requiring factual proof cannot be determinatively decided on PO. Pleadings Order VII Rule 1 CPC Statement of value may appear anywhere in the plaint and multiple passages may disclose value. Overriding objective invoked to prevent injustice.
|
2 May 2025 |
| April 2025 |
|
|
Default judgment entered where defendants defaulted at pre-trial; affidavit proved claim; decree subject to newspaper publication before execution.
Commercial courts – Default judgment – Striking out defence for failure to attend pre-trial conference – Rule 31(1)(a). Commercial courts – Entry of default judgment on Form No.1 and affidavit – Rule 22 – proof on preponderance of probabilities (Evidence Act s.3(2)(b)). Reliefs – monetary judgment, commercial and decretal interest rates, and costs. Procedural condition – publication of decree before execution under Rule 22(2).
|
25 April 2025 |
|
Court may cure a pathological arbitration clause by incorporating institutional rules and refer the dispute to arbitration.
• Arbitration law – Pathological arbitration clause – appointment of non-existent authority renders clause inoperable.• Pro-arbitration approach – court may cure/supplement defective arbitration clauses to give effect to parties' intention.• Power to incorporate institutional arbitration rules – court ordered incorporation of NCC Arbitration Rules 2001 (reprinted 2017).• Referral to arbitration – matter transferred to arbitration and plaintiff ordered to initiate proceedings within 30 days.
|
25 April 2025 |
|
Court joined a party under Order I r.10(2) where absent party’s interests would be affected by the main suit.
Civil procedure – Joinder of parties – Order I r.10(2) CPC – second alternative: adding persons whose presence is necessary for complete adjudication. Distinction between Order I r.10(2) and Order I r.3 – necessary party versus party against whom right to relief arises. Commercial disputes intertwined with joint venture/management agreements – potential effect on proprietary interests justifies joinder. Arbitration clause and jurisdictional objections are premature at the joinder stage.
|
25 April 2025 |
|
Court cures a pathological lease arbitration clause by directing institutional arbitration under TIArb Rules and ordering commencement within 30 days.
Arbitration law — Court supervisory powers under the Arbitration Act; pathological arbitration clause; institutionalization of ad hoc arbitration; appointment of arbitrator; incorporation of TIArb Rules (2022); misapplication of Civil Procedure Code (Arbitration Rules) for Arbitration Act matters.
|
25 April 2025 |
|
Mortgagee lawfully sold mortgaged property; the applicant failed to prove unlawful sale, misuse of business goodwill, or damages.
Land law – mortgagee remedies – sale of mortgaged property under sections 126 and 127 Land Act – requirement of statutory default notice and public auction. Contract/exclusivity agreements – an exclusivity agreement between borrower and prospective buyer does not bind a mortgagee who is not a party. Evidence – burden of proof lies on the claimant to establish irregularity, market value, misuse of business name, and damages; absence of receipts, correspondence or independent witnesses is fatal. Remedies – relief to set aside a mortgage sale requires cogent evidence of procedural or substantive illegality and demonstrated damages.
|
25 April 2025 |
|
High Court Commercial Division sub-registries retain jurisdiction; misjoinder and joint verification do not defeat the suit.
Commercial law – jurisdiction of High Court Commercial Division and its sub-registries – territorial limits and administrative convenience Civil Procedure – section 18 CPC – forum conveniens and its scope vis-à-vis High Court divisions Civil Procedure – Order I Rule 1 – joinder of plaintiffs where claims arise from series of transactions or raise common questions Civil Procedure – Order VI Rule 15 – verification of pleadings and limits of preliminary objections when factual disputes arise
|
25 April 2025 |
|
Exhaustion of arbitral remedies does not bar an application for extension of time to challenge an arbitral award.
Arbitration law – extension of time to challenge arbitral award – exhaustion of arbitral remedies – section 77(2) Arbitration Act – distinction between applications for extension of time and substantive court challenges under sections 74/76 – statutory limitation governs time for challenging awards.
|
25 April 2025 |
|
A first-ranking chargeholder can successfully challenge attachment even when objecting shortly before a scheduled auction.
Execution — Attachment and Proclamation of Sale — Objection filed shortly before auction — Whether delay bars investigation under Order XXI r.57 proviso; Proprietary interests — First-ranking debenture as creating saleable interest in movables; Court’s discretion to lift attachment vs continue subject to charge.
|
16 April 2025 |
|
Suit for damages dismissed as res judicata after prior ruling set aside the sale; plaintiff to pay half costs.
Commercial law – execution of decree – public auction sale – sale declared illegal – res subjudice and res judicata – issue estoppel and estoppel by record – functus officio – costs where suit dismissed at preliminary stage.
|
15 April 2025 |
|
An interim status quo order requires pending proceedings; applicants failed to show this and the application was dismissed with costs.
Status quo – interim orders – must be predicated on pending main proceedings; Land Act s.127 – 60-day default notice requirement before sale of mortgaged property; burden of proof – applicant must show pending proceedings and legal basis for status quo; res judicata/previous final adjudication; abuse of process – seeking indefinite status quo is improper.
|
11 April 2025 |
|
Petitioner failed to prove unfairly prejudicial conduct under s.233; petition dismissed for lack of evidence and overlap with prior judgment.
Company law — unfair prejudice petition (s.233 Companies Act) — elements required: conduct of company’s affairs; prejudice; unfairness; petitioner as member — burden of proof and evidence; effect of prior judgment and functus officio; appropriate remedies (enforcement of orders, s.233(3), ordinary suits); rectification of company register at BRELA.
|
11 April 2025 |
|
Preliminary objections requiring evidence on limitation, signatory authority, or document authenticity are improper and thus overruled.
Civil procedure – Preliminary objection – Whether issues of limitation, signatory authority for corporate pleadings, and authenticity/validity of annexed documents may be decided on PO or require evidence and merits determination.
|
11 April 2025 |
|
Parties reached a settlement requiring Defendant's payment of TZS 242,353,613.88 for supplied goods.
Contract Law - Settlement Agreement - Payment of goods - Enforcement of Deed of Settlement.
|
11 April 2025 |