|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2012 |
|
|
Land Division dismissed a monetary counterclaim as lacking cause of action and outside its jurisdiction.
Civil procedure – Counterclaim – Requirement that counterclaim disclose a cause of action against the defendant and be maintainable as a separate action; Jurisdiction – Land Division’s subject-matter and pecuniary limits; monetary claims unconnected to land are outside Land Division jurisdiction; Declaratory relief – cannot circumvent jurisdictional limits; Preliminary objections – may be decided on pleadings where lack of cause of action or jurisdiction is established.
|
12 December 2012 |
|
Land court dismisses counterclaim as it discloses no cause of action and is outside the court’s jurisdiction.
Preliminary objection to counterclaim – Cause of action must be disclosed – Counterclaim must be maintainable as separate action and within forum’s jurisdiction – Land Court lacks jurisdiction over purely monetary claims unrelated to land.
|
12 December 2012 |
|
Review application timely but inappropriate; re-admission under Order XXXIX Rule 19 was the correct remedy.
Civil Procedure – Review – Form of application mutatis mutandis to appeals; copy of ruling to accompany review application; Limitation – 30 days; time obtaining copy excluded (s.19(1) Cap 89); Review available only for manifest error on face of record, fraud, or denial of hearing; Dismissal for want of prosecution – remedy is re-admission under Order XXXIX Rule 19; Errors of law/obiter proper for appeal, not review; Vague citation "any other enabling provisions" unnecessary.
|
11 December 2012 |
|
Appellate court upheld tribunals’ finding that respondent’s evidence outweighed appellant’s, dismissing appellant’s ownership claim.
Land law – ownership disputes – evaluation of evidence and credibility; adverse possession – requirement of exclusive long-term possession; appellate review – deference to tribunal credibility findings; locus in quo inspection and admissibility of documents.
|
7 December 2012 |
|
Reported
A director cannot sue personally for wrongs to his company; suit struck out for lack of capacity despite existent cause of action.
Company law – separate legal personality (Salomon principle); rule in Foss v Harbottle – members/directors cannot sue for company’s wrongs; locus standi/capacity to sue; cause of action – Auto Garage v Motokov three-part test (right, violation, liability).
|
3 December 2012 |
| November 2012 |
|
|
Reported
A sale of matrimonial land without the applicant’s consent is null; purchaser must inquire under the Land Act.
Land law – Sale of land held in one spouse’s name – duty of purchaser to inquire about co‑spouse’s consent (Land Act s.161(2),(3); Law of Marriage Act s.59) – sale without spousal consent voidable/null – tribunal decision set aside.
|
29 November 2012 |
|
Extension of time for revision refused where applicant defaulted at trial and the Tribunal had jurisdiction.
Civil procedure – extension of time for revision – applicant’s default at trial and withdrawal of application to set aside ex parte decree – jurisdictional objections must be raised during trial – Rule 4 Order XLII CPC.
|
28 November 2012 |
|
High Court set aside an ex parte stay of execution given after a consensual strike-out, holding the tribunal erred and natural justice was affected.
Civil procedure – stay of execution – ex parte interlocutory orders – requirements and limits Civil procedure – effect of consensual/struck-out orders on subsequent execution proceedings Natural justice – right to be heard where interlocutory relief affects a party who sought strike-out for settlement Tribunal jurisdiction – error in issuing stay without evidence of ongoing settlement or performance
|
19 November 2012 |
|
Whether customary law confers title and standing to mortgage, and whether a boundary can be a physical land feature.
Customary land law – clan-inheritance rules – effect on capacity to own, mortgage or sell land. Informal (unregistered) mortgages – redemption and sale – effect of mutual sale agreement between mortgagor and mortgagee. Locus standi – representative suits on clan land – requirement to demonstrate explicit authority to represent the clan. Civil procedure – role of assessors and written submissions – effect on participation and disqualification claims. Boundary disputes – characterization of a physical feature (hill) as the land in dispute; reliance on Ward Tribunal evidence on appeal.
|
5 November 2012 |
|
Appellate tribunal erred by deciding ex parte without proper service and without original Ward Tribunal record; rehearing ordered.
Land procedure – Service of process – Service by Village Executive Officer or Hamlet Chairman is not proper; Court Process Server must effect service. Procedural fairness – Right to be heard – Ex parte determination without proper service violates right to be heard. Record requirements – Appellate tribunal must have original or certified proceedings of Ward Tribunal; uncertified photocopies are inadequate. Remedy – Quash lower proceedings and order rehearing de novo.
|
2 November 2012 |
|
District Land Tribunal correctly applied res judicata but lacked jurisdiction to nullify Primary Court letters of administration.
Land law – res judicata – effect of an unreversed Ward Tribunal decision on subsequent proceedings between same parties. Tribunal jurisdiction – District Land and Housing Tribunal lacks power to hear probate and administration matters or to nullify letters of administration. Probate law – Probate and Administration Ordinance (Cap 445) governs grants; Law of Limitation Act not strictly applicable to probate. Procedural law – proper forum to challenge letters of administration is the issuing court or a superior court on appeal.
|
2 November 2012 |
|
Subsequent suit on same easement between same parties was barred by res judicata; appeal allowed with costs.
Civil procedure – Res judicata – Section 9 Civil Procedure Code – applicability where same parties, same cause (easement), competence and final decision in prior suit – subsequent suit barred.
|
2 November 2012 |
|
Appellant failed to prove ownership or tenancy; tribunal’s factual findings upheld and appeal dismissed with costs.
Land disputes — proof of ownership — credibility of oral testimony and absence of documentary evidence; Jurisdiction — proceedings before courts lacking land jurisdiction are void; Burden of proof — party alleging ownership or asserting tenancy must call supporting witnesses/documents; Appellate review — appellate court will not disturb tribunal’s factual findings absent good reason.
|
2 November 2012 |
|
Negotiations and a litigant’s unfamiliarity with procedure can justify enlargement of time to file an appeal.
Extension of time – Reasonable and sufficient cause – Negotiations and execution as grounds for delay; Procedural rules as handmaids of justice – courts should not use technicalities to bar access to justice; Lay litigant’s unfamiliarity with procedure as factor in granting enlargement of time; Need for fresh tribunal chair to hear reheard appeal to preserve fairness.
|
2 November 2012 |
|
Appellant’s uncorroborated hearsay failed to rebut Village Land Committee evidence; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – proof of ownership/occupation – allocation during villagilization – evidentiary value of Village Land Committee testimony and DLHT locus inspection; hearsay insufficient to displace concurrent tribunal findings.
|
2 November 2012 |
|
Reported
Earlier occupant had superior claim, but practical impossibility of restoration justified compensation and alternative plot.
Land law – priority of occupation/title – earlier occupant has superior claim to subsequently allocated plot; Administrative acts – unlawful subdivision and allocation by local authority; Remedies – when restoration is impracticable due to permanent structures and resurvey, compensation and allocation of alternative plot are appropriate remedies.
|
1 November 2012 |
|
Respondent's long possession and witnessed written allocation established ownership; appeal dismissed.
Land law – long possession/adverse possession and allocation within family – proof by written allocation, witness testimony and tribunal locus visit; appellate review of concurrent findings of fact.
|
1 November 2012 |
| October 2012 |
|
|
Reported
Proceedings brought by a non-existent entity and against a person lacking letters of administration were quashed and ordered retried.
Civil procedure – capacity to sue – non-existent/unregistered party; Trusts – legal personality – suits against trustees not the trust; Locus standi – administration of estates – letters of administration required; Appellate powers – calling additional evidence under s.34(1)(b) – requires application, relevance, credibility and opportunity to cross‑examine; Quashing of proceedings and retrial de novo.
|
31 October 2012 |
|
District Land and Housing Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over Ward Tribunal criminal appeals; its proceedings were void.
Jurisdiction of Ward Tribunal to try criminal offences; appeals from Ward Tribunal criminal matters lie to Primary Court; District Land and Housing Tribunal lacks criminal appellate jurisdiction; invalid exercise of section 35(1)(b) where appellate tribunal lacks jurisdiction; proceedings of tribunal without jurisdiction are nullities.
|
29 October 2012 |
|
Land recovery claim dismissed as time‑barred after appellant failed to prove ownership or prior proceedings.
Land law – recovery of possession – limitation period – 12 years; continuous and uninterrupted possession; burden of proof and documentary evidence; alleged prior proceedings treated as afterthought; appellate review of tribunal findings of fact.
|
29 October 2012 |
|
Ex parte appellate judgment quashed for defective service and improper delegation of process-server duties; matter remitted for rehearing with costs.
Land procedure – service of process – process server must effect service personally; delegation to village officials not recognized – substituted service by publication must be proved – ex parte appellate hearing and failure to determine co-appellant’s appeal constitute procedural irregularity – appellate proceedings quashed and matter remitted for rehearing.
|
29 October 2012 |
|
Appeal titled as a "Memorandum" was not fatal; appeal filed beyond 60 days was incompetent and struck out.
Land law – Appeals to High Court under s.38 Cap 216 – nature of document: "Petition of Appeal" vs "Memorandum of Appeal" – nomenclature not fatal. Limitation – s.38(1) Cap 216 – time runs from date judgment pronounced; 60-day period mandatory absent extension. Procedure – attachment of judgment/records not a condition precedent for filing petitions from Ward Tribunal. Remedies – incompetent, time‑barred appeals should be struck out, not dismissed.
|
25 October 2012 |
|
Informal occupation or private grant without lawful allocation does not defeat registered owner's title; respondent held a trespasser.
Land law – Ownership vs. adverse possession – Informal private grant insufficient to confer title – Allocation by Village Land Council required – Trespass.
|
24 October 2012 |
|
Time to appeal from the District Land Tribunal runs from judgment date; late appeals are incompetent and struck out.
Land law — Appeals from District Land and Housing Tribunal — Section 38(1) Cap 216 — Time for filing an appeal runs from date judgment pronounced; copies of proceedings/judgment/decree not mandatory — Petition and payment of fees complete filing — Computation of limitation under Section 19(1) Cap 89 — Incompetent late appeals to be struck out, not dismissed.
|
18 October 2012 |
|
An appeal filed after the 60‑day statutory period is incompetent and is struck out rather than dismissed.
Land law — Appeals — Time for filing appeals under Section 38(1) Cap. 216; limitation computed from date of judgment; petition and fees sufficient for filing; attachment of judgment not mandatory; incompetent appeal struck out (not dismissed); Court raising lateness suo motu — no costs.
|
17 October 2012 |
|
Whether the tribunal erred in assessing evidence and accepting the respondent's title documents in a land ownership dispute.
Land law — ownership dispute; evidentiary weight of oral testimony regarding administration of a deceased's estate; authenticity and admissibility of title documents – alleged forgery and absence of sellers' signatures; proof of transfer — witness requirements; scope of review on second appeal.
|
11 October 2012 |
|
The District Land and Housing Tribunal correctly treated the matter as an appeal from a valid Ward Tribunal; the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Land law – Appeals – Appeal from Ward Tribunal to District Land and Housing Tribunal – existence and constitution of Ward Tribunal and appealability of its decisions. Procedural irregularity – Allegation of improperly constituted Ward Tribunal sitting (number of members, chairperson) – assessment of record and validity of proceedings. Relief – Claim for retrial and challenge to pecuniary jurisdiction – dismissed where no substantiated irregularity.
|
4 October 2012 |
|
Temporary injunction dismissed as overtaken by events after eviction; substantive appeal remains pending.
Land law – interim relief – application for temporary injunction – overtaken by events where eviction occurred – preliminary objection dispositive; Order XXXVII r.1 & S.95 CPC.
|
2 October 2012 |
| September 2012 |
|
|
Reported
Village council cannot re-allocate land in another villager’s possession; appellant declared lawful owner despite later certificate.
Land law – village land allocation – legality of re-allocation of land already in possession and development of another villager. Evidence – contradictions and hearsay – effect on credibility of allocation claim. Land registration – Section 33 Land Registration Act – limits where grant/registration procured improperly or fraudulently. Customary rights – customary/right of occupancy equal in status to granted right unless lawfully revoked or surrendered.
|
28 September 2012 |
|
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution after counsel withdrew due to lack of client cooperation under O.39 R.17(1) CPC.
Civil procedure – Withdrawal of counsel – Counsel permitted to withdraw where clients fail to cooperate or give instructions. Civil procedure – Dismissal for non-prosecution – Court’s power under Order 39 Rule 17(1) CPC to dismiss appeals not actively prosecuted.
|
27 September 2012 |
|
Acceptance of a letter of offer combined with long possession and development confers superior title over later allocations.
Land law – allocation of land – double/triple allocation – effect of multiple letters of offer and abandonment of earlier allocation. Land law – contractual completion – acceptance of letter of offer within stipulated period completes grant of right of occupancy. Possession and improvements – long uninterrupted occupation (12+ years) and development protects against dispossession. Civil procedure – counterclaim – tribunal’s duty to consider counterclaims and join necessary parties (Order VIII r.10 CPC). Pleadings – court must adjudicate issues as pleaded; cannot determine unpleaded title basis (customary/deemed occupancy).
|
25 September 2012 |
|
Abandonment and village reallocation, coupled with the limitation period, justified upholding the Ward Tribunal and allowing the appeal.
Land law – village reallocation under Operation Vijiji – validity of village allocation as basis of title. Abandonment of land and subsequent acquisition by others through village allocation. Limitation Act (Cap.89 R.E.2002) – Rule 22, Part I, Column I – time bar to recovery of land after 12 years. Appellate review – error by District Land and Housing Tribunal in setting aside Ward Tribunal decision.
|
25 September 2012 |
|
Locus in quo measurement confirming disputed boundaries was proper; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – boundary dispute – ward tribunal – visit to locus in quo and physical measurement – confirmation of area based on landmarks – not unlawful reassignment of boundaries – appeal dismissed.
|
20 September 2012 |
|
Extension of time granted because tribunal’s procedural and legal defects raised sufficient cause despite applicant’s delayed filing.
Extension of time – sufficient cause – sickness not shown to account for delay – illegality and procedural irregularity in tribunal decision (failure to give reasons; jurisdictional uncertainty) as sufficient cause – prospect of success on appeal considered.
|
17 September 2012 |
|
Reported
Boundary dispute remitted for Land Officer/Surveyor evidence to determine alleged encroachment.
Land law — boundary disputes — encroachment — necessity of land surveyor/Land Officer evidence where beacons contested; title deed and officer’s letters insufficient alone; res judicata not established.
|
14 September 2012 |
|
High Court quashed tribunal eviction order obtained by collusion and misrepresentation, allowed revision and awarded costs.
Land law – Revision of tribunal proceedings – High Court’s power under s.79 CPC and ss.41/43 Land Disputes Courts Act to call records and revise where fraud or material irregularity is shown. Evidence – Collusion and misrepresentation – Proceedings procured by fraudulent facts are nullities. Jurisdiction – Pecuniary jurisdiction – tribunal competent to hear genuine lease/possession claims (rent Tshs 150,000).
|
14 September 2012 |
|
Court refused applicant's injunction and arbitrator appointment, upholding contractual right to sell guarantor's deposited properties.
Contract law – Enforcement of contractual sale clause permitting sale of guarantor’s deposited properties on buyer default – Injunctions – temporary injunctions cannot override express contractual rights or be perpetual; Order XXXVII Rule 3 limits duration – Arbitration law – notice of intention to arbitrate is not commencement; court will not appoint arbitrator absent valid commencement – Constitutional provisions should be invoked sparingly.
|
12 September 2012 |
|
Extension of time granted due to forum confusion, jurisdictional illegality (adverse possession), and prospects of success.
Civil procedure — extension of time — whether delay of over three years can be excused where there is confusion about forum and jurisdictional illegality. Jurisdiction — Ward Tribunal — competence to decide adverse possession — decisions on matters beyond jurisdiction amount to illegality justifying extension of time. Procedure — composition of Tribunal — failure to sit with required assessors (and absence of woman) undermines validity of proceedings. Appeal prospects — likelihood of success is a relevant consideration when granting extension of time.
|
4 September 2012 |
| August 2012 |
|
|
Appellant’s encroachment into agreed easement breached the agreement; locus visit unnecessary; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – easement – interpretation of written agreement – when locus in quo visit is necessary; Civil procedure – locus in quo inspections discouraged unless record unclear or additional inquiries under s.34(1)(b),(c) required; Contract – alleged promise outside written agreement not binding; self-help encroachment constitutes breach; Evidence – evaluation of witness credibility; Requirements for reasons – compliance with Order XX Rule 4 CPC.
|
30 August 2012 |
|
An ex parte Ward Tribunal judgment must be set aside (not revised) first; revision is only for apparent errors; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – Ward Tribunal ex parte judgments – proper remedy is application to set aside under Order IX Rule 13(1) CPC; revisionary jurisdiction is exceptional and limited to apparent errors on the face of the record; extension of time to file revision inappropriate where correct remedy is setting aside the ex parte order.
|
30 August 2012 |
|
Wrong or omitted citation of enabling statute rendered the applicant's revision application incompetent and was struck out with leave to refile.
Land law — Procedural law — Competency of application — Wrong or omitted citation of enabling statutory provision is fatal; High Court (Land Division) revisional powers under section 42 of the Land Disputes Courts Act; Order 21 Rule 24(1) CPC and section 19 CPC are inapplicable where no decree or proper jurisdictional basis is shown.
|
30 August 2012 |
|
Wrong or missing citation of the enabling statute renders a revision application incompetent and leads to striking out.
Civil procedure – Competency of application – Wrong or no citation of enabling provision is fatal; Land Disputes Courts Act s42 is the relevant provision for High Court appellate/revisional jurisdiction; CPC Order 21 r24(1) not applicable where no decree is before court; application struck out with leave to re-file.
|
30 August 2012 |
|
Applicant’s denial disbelieved; sale proved on balance of probabilities; appeal dismissed with costs.
Evidence — assessment and credibility of witness testimony; burden of proof in civil cases — proof on balance of probabilities; appellate review of factual findings of tribunal; failure to call village authority not fatal where claimant's evidence is credible and corroborated.
|
23 August 2012 |
|
A recorded deed of settlement becomes a court decree and should be enforced by execution, not by punitive default clauses.
Land law / settlement – recorded deed of settlement – becomes court decree if certain and binding on parties Civil procedure – enforcement – execution of decree as appropriate remedy for default Contract/settlement terms – court should not convert amicable settlements into punitive arrangements by adding coercive default clauses
|
15 August 2012 |
|
Reported
A spouse’s matrimonial status does not bar mortgage sale of registered land absent a registered caveat protecting that interest.
Matrimonial home – spouse’s rights – Section 59(1) Law of Marriage Act – registrable interest must be protected by registered caveat to prevent alienation of registered land. Customary marriage – proof and presumption of marriage (Section 160) – presumption inapplicable where customary marriage established. Land law – non-retrospectivity – later Land Act provisions cannot be applied retrospectively to invalidate earlier transactions. Validity of mortgage and auction – unregistered spouse interest does not render mortgage or auction void. Civil procedure – court may raise issues suo motu if no injustice results.
|
12 August 2012 |
|
Delay did not justify extension, but Ward Tribunal proceedings were void for lacking a required female member; retrial ordered.
Land Disputes Courts Act, 2002 — tribunal composition — mandatory gender requirement under ss.11 and 14(1) — failure renders proceedings nullity; Extension of time — requirement to show good and sufficient cause; Revisional jurisdiction — s.36(1)(b) power to quash defective Ward Tribunal proceedings; Procedural fairness — parties’ duty to pursue appeal and tribunal’s limited duty to guide litigants.
|
7 August 2012 |
|
Delay caused by preferred advocate's absence did not constitute sufficient cause to extend time; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – extension of time to appeal – appeal from Ward Tribunal to District Tribunal – Regulation 13(3) – sufficiency of reasons – absence of preferred advocate not automatically good cause – ignorance of law/procedure not sufficient.
|
4 August 2012 |
|
District tribunal’s failure to consider the Ward Tribunal’s map and the identity of the land vitiated its decision; appeal allowed.
Land law – appeal – identity of disputed land; relevance of prior High Court judgment; importance of locus in quo visit and ward map; procedural fairness – failure of appellate tribunal to consider material map vitiates its decision; restoration of ward tribunal decision.
|
3 August 2012 |
|
An unauthorized tribunal transfer and mid-hearing change of assessors rendered the eviction proceedings null and void.
Land law – District Land and Housing Tribunal – unauthorized transfer of file between tribunals – fatal irregularity and nullity; Composition of tribunal – change of chairperson and assessors mid-hearing – incurable procedural irregularity; Proper parties – administrator of estate versus occupant – procedural objection; Remedy – quashing of proceedings and liberty to refile.
|
2 August 2012 |
| July 2012 |
|
|
Applicant's unprepared counsel and unjustified adjournment led to dismissal for failure to prosecute and costs.
Land procedure — Revision application — Failure to prosecute — Counsel unpreparedness and unjustified adjournment — Non-appearance treated as ground for dismissal under Order IX Rule 8 CPC — Costs awarded.
|
26 July 2012 |