|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| March 2020 |
|
|
Applicant granted extension to serve notice of appeal after demonstrating diligent but unsuccessful attempts to effect service.
Extension of time; Section 14(1) Law of Limitation Act; service of notice of appeal; Rule 84(1)/(2) Court of Appeal Rules; exclusion of time under Section 21(2) Law of Limitation; unsuccessful service at advocate’s office; leave to appeal relevant to discretion.
|
2 March 2020 |
|
The applicant's interim injunction was struck out for citing incorrect enabling provisions instead of JALA section 2(3).
Civil Procedure – temporary injunctions – Mareva-type interim orders – availability without a pending suit where common law is properly imported. Judicature and Application of Laws Act – section 2(3) required to apply common law doctrines; sections 2(1) and 5 are general jurisdictional provisions only. Civil Procedure Code – Order XXXVII governs injunctions where a main suit exists; section 68(c) and (e) inappropriate alone for Mareva injunctions. Procedural law – wrong citation or failure to cite the enabling provision renders application incompetent and liable to be struck out. Government Proceedings – 90‑day notice requirement affects commencement of main suit and contextualizes interlocutory relief requests.
|
2 March 2020 |
| February 2020 |
|
|
Respondent's earlier village allocation prevails; appellant failed to rebut, so appeal dismissed with costs.
Land law – dispute over village allocations – double allocation – priority to first allocation (quod prius est tempore potius est jure) – requirement of cogent evidence to rebut earlier allocation; appellate review of Tribunal's factual findings.
|
27 February 2020 |
|
Citing a statute without specifying the applicable subsection rendered an extension application incompetent and it was struck out.
Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.11 – extension of time – requirement to specify the exact subsection relied upon; incompetence of application for failure to cite subsection; preliminary objection – striking out; costs.
|
27 February 2020 |
|
Appellant's unproven oral claim and untendered documents insufficient to displace tribunal finding of village/government ownership.
Land law – ownership proof; admissibility of documents – untendered letters; locus in quo inspections; village acquisition of land; appellate interference with tribunal findings.
|
26 February 2020 |
|
Appellant failed to rebut respondent's registered title; adverse possession and damages claims were unproven; appeal dismissed.
Land law – ownership – registered title vs adverse possession – significance of certificate of title (Exh D1). Evidence – burden to rebut registered title and requirements to prove adverse possession. Damages – requirement to plead and prove special damages for destroyed crops; general damages not established. Limitation – objection raised at appellate stage considered but found without merit in context. Civil procedure – appellate review of tribunal's evaluation of evidence and factual findings.
|
26 February 2020 |
|
Appellant failed to prove land value exceeded Ward Tribunal’s TShs.3,000,000 jurisdiction; appeal dismissed with costs.
Land jurisdiction – Ward Tribunal pecuniary jurisdiction (TShs. 3,000,000) – party alleging higher value must adduce valuation evidence; failure to produce valuation report justifies dismissal of challenge to jurisdiction.
|
24 February 2020 |
|
Failure to cross‑examine on material points and contradictions in allocation evidence defeat respondent's claim to land ownership.
Land law – ownership dispute – credibility of witnesses and effect of failure to cross‑examine on material points. Evidence – contradictions in testimony concerning government allocation and acreage undermine ownership claims. Civil procedure – appellate review – misdirection by first appellate tribunal in assessing evidence.
|
24 February 2020 |
|
Failure to prove alleged illness and account for delay prevents grant of extension of time to seek leave to appeal.
Extension of time – discretionary remedy – applicant must place convincing material to justify extension; medical evidence – must be attributable and authenticate claimed sickness; failure to account for delay – fatal to application.
|
24 February 2020 |
|
Application to restore an appeal dismissed for want of prosecution rejected for failure to show sufficient cause and undue delay.
Civil procedure – restoration of proceedings – re‑admission after dismissal for want of prosecution – requirement to show sufficient cause under Appellate Jurisdiction Act (sub‑rule 3). Civil procedure – delay and abuse of process – prolonged pendency and unexplained non‑appearance as grounds to refuse restoration.
|
21 February 2020 |
|
|
21 February 2020 |
|
Failure to visit locus in quo when boundaries are contested and omission to record assessors' opinions vitiate tribunal proceedings.
Land law – locus in quo – necessity of site visit where boundaries/extent of unsurveyed land are disputed and evidence conflicts. Civil procedure – District Land and Housing Tribunal – mandatory role and recorded opinions of assessors (Section 23, Land Disputes Courts Act; Regulation 19(2)). Procedural irregularity – failure to comply with statutory requirements renders proceedings and judgment a nullity – retrial ordered.
|
18 February 2020 |
|
Leave to refile does not extend the limitation period; a struck-out appeal’s time runs from the original judgment date.
Civil Procedure – Limitation – Effect of "leave to refile" under Order XXIII Rule 2 – does not extend time for instituting a fresh suit or appeal Civil Procedure – Striking out – parties revert to pre-filing position; limitation runs from original judgment date Remedies – filing a fresh appeal after strike-out requires being within time or obtaining extension of time
|
14 February 2020 |
|
Prior purchaser’s valid sale prevails; later overlapping transfer is null and trespass claim fails.
Land law – competing sales from same vendor – priority of purchase and proof on balance of probabilities – effect of prior valid sale on subsequent transfers – trespass claim fails where prior purchaser holds title.
|
12 February 2020 |
|
Extension of time to appeal granted after excluding time taken to obtain certified copy of tribunal ruling.
Land law – Extension of time to appeal – Section 41(2) Land Disputes Courts Act; Limitation Act s19(1) – exclusion of period to obtain certified copies of judgments/rulings in computing time; computation of time; want of prosecution.
|
12 February 2020 |
| January 2020 |
|
|
High Court found appeal filed outside extended time and tribunal erred in accepting late filing without proof of an authorised payment exception.
Land law – Appeals – Filing requirements – Payment of filing fees and issuance of receipt as constituting proper filing; Procedural law – Electronic payment system difficulties do not excuse late filing absent official circular or authority; Civil procedure – Preliminary objection on limitation/time is a point of law and reviewable by the High Court.
|
20 January 2020 |