Court of Appeal of Tanzania

This is the highest level in the justice delivery system in Tanzania. The Court of Appeal draws its mandate from Article 117(1) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. The Court hears appeals on both point of law and facts for cases originating from the High Court of Tanzania and Magistrates with extended jurisdiction in exercise of their original jurisdiction or appellate and revisional jurisdiction over matters originating in the District Land and Housing Tribunals, District Courts and Courts of Resident Magistrate. The Court also hears similar appeals from quasi judicial bodies of status equivalent to that of the High Court. It further hears appeals on point of law against the decision of the High Court in matters originating from Primary Courts. The Court of Appeal also exercises jurisdiction on appeals originating from the High Court of Zanzibar except for constitutional issues arising from the interpretation of the Constitution of Zanzibar and matters arising from the Kadhi Court.

Physical address

26 Kivukoni Road Building P.O. Box 9004, Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.

Visit website

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

Court of Appeal of Tanzania

8,571 documents

Court registries

All years

Filters

Filters
Judges

Msumi, J.

Fikirini, J.A.

Juma, J.A.

Juma, J.

Kalegeya, J.

Sehel, J.

Mugasha, J.

Ismail, J.A.

Mapigano, Ag. J.A.

Rwizile, J.

Kimaro, J.

Mdemu, J.A.

Luanda, J.A.

Mugasha, J.A.

Mustafa, Ag. CJ.

Chipeta, J.

Mkasimongwa, J.

Mashaka, J.A.

Mwampashi, J.A.

Twaib, J.

Ramadhani, C.J.

Levira, J.A.

Kileo, J.A.

Maige, J.A.

Magoiga, J.

Mmila, J.

Kaijage, J.A.

Mwaikugile, J.

Nyalali, C.J.

Munuo, J.A.

Kwariko, J.

Kileo, J.

Bampikya, SDR

Mwakipesile, J.

Bwana, J.A.

Lubuva, J.A.

Morris, J.

Lubuva, J.

Lila, J.A.

Kahyoza, J.

Phillip, J.

Bubeshi, J.

Kente, J.A.

Omar, J.A.

Bongole, J.

Mziray, J.

Ndika, J.A.

Shangali - DR

Mlasiri, J.A.

Khamis, J.

Kihwelo, J.

Muruke, J.A.

Mustafa, J.A.

Kihwelo, J.A.

Mwsarija, J.A.

Khamis, J.A.

Kimaro, J.A.

Makungu, J.A.

Msoffe, J.

Mmilla, J.A.

Sehel, J.A.

Luvuba, J.

Mwangesi, J.

Massati, J.A.

Rumanyika, J.

Kente, J.

Mussa, J.A.

Masoud, J.A.

Mutungi, J.

Mgeyekwa, J.A.

Ramadhani, J.

Mjasiri, J.

Mwambegele, J.A.

Ngwembe, J.

Kisanga, J.A.

Mwakasendo, J.A.

Mlacha, J.A.

Mbarouk, J.A.

Ngwembe, J.A.

Mroso, J.A.

Mwangesi, J.A.

Juma, C.J.

Lugakingira, J.A.

Masoud, J.

Mnzavas, J.A.

Kwariko, J.A.

Kiwonde, J.

Kairo, J.A.

Mujulizi, J.

Samatta, J.

Othman, J.

Kerefu, J.A.

Rutakangwa, J.A

Mroso, J.

Mjasiri, J.A.

Songoro, J.

Korosso, J.A.

Chipeta, Ag. J.A.

Rumanyika, DR.

Amour, J.

Mussa, J.

Massati, J.

Mwambegele, J.

Othman, C.J.

Mgonya, J.A.

Luanda, J.

Mfalila, J.A.

Siyani, J.

Mkuye, J.

Galeba, J.

Mfalila, Ag. J.A.

Msoffe, J.A.

Othman, J.A.

Ramadhani, J.A.

Mwarija, J.A.

Kisanga, J.

Samatta, C.J.

Galeba, J.A.

Kaji, J.A.

Mapigano, J.A.

Munuo, Ag. C.J.

Kitusi, J.A.

Samatta, J.A.

Ndumbaro, J.

Issa, J.A.

Makame, J.A.

Nsekela, J.

Munuo, J.

Mwandambo, J.A.

Oriyo, J.A.

Rumanyika, J.A.

Makame, J.

Nsekela, J.A.

Kalegeya, J.A.

Mwarija, J.

Msoffe, PRM-E.J.

Kaji, J.

Mkuye, J.A.

Muruke, J.

Wambali, J.A.

Shangwa, J.

Rutakangwa, J.

Revira, J.A.

Mussati, J.

Mandia, J.A.

Juma, Ag. C.J.

Utamwa, J.

Mziray, J.A.

Kulita, J.
Outcomes

Application for reference is dismissed.

Appeal Allowed with costs

Applicant may make an oral application before the Court in the cause of hearing of the appeal to furnish the Court with the intended additional evidence

Appeal allowed , accordingly quash the appellant's conviction and substitute it with an acquittal resulting into setting aside the sentence imposed on the appellant, consequently, order for immediate release of the appellant from prison unless he is being held for some other lawful cause

Application dismissed in it entirely

Accept the invitation extended to us by the learned counsel of the parties and hereby invoke our power of revision bestowed upon us under section 4 (2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap 141 of the Revised Edition 2019, quash and set aside the entire proceedings and judgment of the trial court together with subsequent orders, further direct that Land Case No. 46 of 2014 be set down for trial after the Registrar of Titles is joined as a party in terms of Order 1 Rule 10 (2) of the CPC,

Appeal allowed and order the appellant to be released from custody unless he is otherwise held for other lawful cause (s).

Appellants should remain in custody pending composition and delivery of the judgment by the trial court

The prayer for extension of time is granted to allow the applicant to lodge the contemplated appeal to the Court

Application allowed for extension of time to file the appeal

Appeal allowed accordingly, nullify and quash the judgment of the High Court and set aside all consequential orders, remit the case file to the High Court for composing a judgment after hearing the parties on the new issues, make no order as to costs to the parties as none of them is blameworthy of the path taken by the 1st appellate court.

Appeal partly succeeds to the extent of the second and third grounds of appeal.

Application dismissed with costs

Appeal allowed, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence imposed on him. We further order the appellant be released from the prison forthwith unless he is otherwise lawfully held

Appeal is devoid of merit, and hereby dismiss it with costs.

Application for reference before the High Court judge was incompetent since such court had no jurisdiction to entertain and determine it. Consequently, we find merit in the application and grant it.

Quash the conviction and set aside the sentence of 30 years imprisonment on the appellant. We order the immediate release of the appellant from prison unless he is being held there for another lawful cause.

Appeal partially allowed

Invoke the revisional powers under section 4 (2) of the Appellate jurisdiction Act [Cap 141, R.E. 2019], quash that part of the High Court order dated 10.12.2020 directing EBK to file its written statement of defence and nullify all the proceedings subsequent to that order, also quash the resultant judgment and remit the record of Commercial Case No. 105 of 2020 to the High Court (Commercial Division) for retrial of the case after the mandatory provisions of Order I rule 10 (4) of the CPC have been complied with.

Appeal allowed, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence order the appellant's release immediately if his continued incarceration is not for another lawful cause.

Appeal is devoid of merit and dismissed it.

Appeal strike out

Application dismissed with costs

The Court decline to entertain the application in terms of rule 60(1) of the Rules, therefore, adjourned the hearing of the application for determination by the Court.

Invoke revisional authority in pursuance of section 4 (2) of the AJA and quash the consequential order

Court find merit in this Application considered opinion that the applicants gave plausible reasons which amounted to good cause to warrant extension of time under rule 10 of the Rules. Consequently, the applicants are given 60 days from the date of delivery of this ruling to lodge their memorandum and record of appeal.

Reference Dismissed

Application granted pursuant to rule 11 (2) of the Rules and suspend the execution of the distress warrant issued pending hearing and determination of the intended appeal.

It is settled that such an order will be at loggerhead with the justice of this case, instead, the court agree with Mr. Mwita again who invited us to set the appellant free and leave the matter at the DPP's good wisdom to decided whether to prosecute again or not, this course of action was taken by the Court in Joseph Ngadupa Akilimbaya (supra) and shall do the same but on condition that such decision by the DPP must be taken not later than 18 months from the date of delivery of this judgment, accordingly, order the release of the appellant forthwith unless he is being held for some other lawful cause.

Application fails and is, accordingly, dismissed with costs

Appellant, for the personal injuries suffered, is entitled to compensation in the form of special damages which, as we have found and held above, he specially pleaded and strictly proved as well as general damages grantable at our discretion. However, given that he contributed to the occurrence of the accident as already observed above, we order that he is entitled to only 75% of the total amount awarded as special and general damages, the decretal sum shall attract an interest of 7% at the court's rate from the date of judgment to the date of its satisfaction in full.

Respective trial court's proceedings as a nullity., consequently, the court nullify the same from the date the respondent filed the amended written statement of defence and set aside the decree

Application granted for stay of execution pending the hearing and determination of the intended appeal, on a condition that the USD 600,000.00 already deposited at the Judiciary account considered as a security for the due performance of the decree.

The matter to be remitted to the trial court for a trial to be conducted as expeditiously as possible

Appeal allowed, quash the proceedings in relation to the appellant and the conviction entered, set aside the sentence imposed on the appellant and order that the Tshs. 500,000/= he paid as fine in lieu of imprisonment be refunded to him,

It was wrong to sentence the appellant to life imprisonment and in addition three strokes of a cane, thus quash the sentences meted on the appellant and allow the appeal to the term served. Consequently, the appellant should be released forthwith unless held for other lawful cause.

The court has quashed and set aside the sentence of seven (7) years' imprisonment on the first, second and third counts and substitute it with the sentence of five (5) years' imprisonment, the substituted sentence, in our view, is appropriate in the case at hand. However, uphold the sentence of the trial court of two years imprisonment on the fourth and fifth counts respectively and also, uphold the order that all sentences should run concurrently. The substituted sentence should run from the date of the appellant's conviction.

Appeal allowed the appeal, nullify the trial court's proceedings, quash conviction and set aside the appellant's sentence, order a retrial of the appellant before a competent court upon receipt of a valid consent from the DPP. In the meantime, the appellant shall remain in custody pending retrial.

In exercise of our revisional powers in terms of section 4(2) of the ADA, proceed to substitute the said sentence with the minimum sentence of thirty years imprisonment which was imposed by the trial court, for the foregoing reasons, and to the above extent, the appeal is partly allowed and partly disallowed.

Notice of Appeal has to be amended

Allowed the 3rd ground of appeal. going forward direct that the record to be remitted to the trial court for the hearing de novo.

Application dismissed

Hearing of appeal is adjourned to another convenient sessions of the Court as it will be fixed by the Registrar after the intended additional evidence has been taken and certified to the Court by the trial court.

Whereby contributory negligence is involved.

Appeal quashed

Appeal allowed , further quash the conviction against the appellant and set aside the sentence imposed on the appellant.

Appeal is devoid of substance and dismiss it with costs.

Appellant should remain in custody pending being committed to the High Court for trial

Application lacks merit and hereby dismiss it in its entirety

Allow the appeal and proceed to quash and set aside the impugned conviction and sentence, the appellant should be promptly released from prison, unless otherwise incarcerated in accordance with the law.

Accused person convicted

The court nullify the entire proceedings, quash the judgment and set aside the resultant decree of the trial court dated 7th May, 2021 but issued on 2nd June, 2021.

Application is meritorious and thus granted..

Application is hereby adjourned to a future session of the Court

In a nutshell, the prosecution did not discharge its duty of proving the case to the standard required, therefore, the appeal is merited and it is allowed. Consequently, the court order the immediate release of the appellant forthwith unless if held for some other lawful cause.

Appeal quashed and set aside the evidence of witnesses so that another Chairman shall hear witnesses afresh by administering oaths before taking their evidence.

Appeal dismissed

Strike out the application with costs.

Appeals are dismissed for lack of merit

Revision dismissed

Quash the conviction and set aside the sentence imposed on the appellant and the appellant be set free unless he is being held for other lawful cause.

Appeal is incompetent due to the defective record of appeal, consequently, we strike it out with costs.

Appeal devoid of merit and it is hereby dismissed in its entirety.

Application struck out

Appeal is therefore allowed, the conviction is quashed and the sentence imposed on the appellant is set aside, further orderd that the appellant be set at liberty forthwith unless he is being so held for any other lawful cause.

ln view of the foregoing, we are constrained to sustain the points of preliminary objection raised by the counsel for the respondents, and find the appeal Is Incompetent. All said, we accordingly strike out the purported appeal with no order as to costs.

Appeal dismissed in its entirety.

Appeal dismissed with costs to the third respondent

Appeal is barren of fruits and we accordingly dismiss it in its entirety

Application declared a nullity, quashed and set aside

Application is strike out with costs

The review proceedings are hereby nullified, the decision of the review and the subsequent orders are set aside remit the record to the High Court for fresh hearing and determination of the application for review. For avoidance of doubts, the said application shall be heard and determined by a Successor Judge.

Application strike out

No merit in the preliminary objection and dismiss it with costs.

Appeal fails and dismissed

Appeal stand dismissed with costs

Allow appellant's appeal, quash conviction, set aside the sentence imposed on him and proceed to order his immediate release from custody unless otherwise lawfully held

Appeal succeeds, with the end result that the judgment of the High Court in relation to the appellant is quashed, and its orders set aside. Although the judgment of the District Court appears to be failing short for not apportioning damages.

Exercising the revisional powers under section 4 (2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap. 141, nullify the proceedings and the decision of the High Court which dismissed the appeal of the appellant and make an order that the hearing of Civil Appeal No. 46 of 2020 should proceed accordingly, this point suffices to dispose of the entire appeal, as such find it unnecessary to deliberate on the ground of appeal raised by the appellant.

Preliminary objection by the first respondent is upheld, application is thus struck out with costs.

Appeal allowed, quash the conviction, set aside the sentences meted out against the appellants. We further order that, the appellants be released forthwith from custody unless held for other lawful reasons

Appeal being unmeritorious, is dismissed in its entirety.

Appeal allowed, quash the appellants' convictions and set aside their sentences, order the appellants to be released forthwith from prison, unless they are otherwise lawfully held.

Prosecution case was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, thus allow the appeal, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on he appellant, finally order the appellant's release from prison unless his continued incarceration is related to other lawful cause.

Nullify the proceedings of the trial court, quash the judgment and set aside the decree, further make an order for an expedited retrial of the suit by another Judge

Appellant should remain in custody and another Magistrate with competent jurisdiction to entere a conviction in compliance with section 235 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA)

Appeal allowed and consequently, quash the proceedings of both the Tribunal and the High Court and set aside the resultant Judgments

Dismissed the appellant's appeal in its entirety

Appeal dismissed it entirely

Appeal allowed quash and set aside the appellant's conviction for murder and sentence of death

In exercise of our revisional powers under section 4 (2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, Cap 141 R. E. 2019, quash and set aside the dismissal order by the High Court in Revision No. 47 of 2016 and, in lieu thereof, substitute it with an order striking out the application.

The Court sustain the two points of abjection and hereby strike out the appeal with costs.

Trial court had jurisdiction to entertain the appellant's application to investigate the ownership of the motor vehicle, thus allow the appeal, quash the ruling of the trial court and the resultant judgment of the High Court on an appeal and set aside all orders made thereto, make a direction that, the original record be remitted to the trial court for hearing and determination on merit of Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 1 of 2021 by another magistrate of competent jurisdiction.

Appeal is deemed to have been withdrawn upon the expiry of the prescribed period of sixty days after its lodgment for failure by the respondent to institute the appeal upon been issued with the certificate of delay each party to bear its own costs

Preliminary objections are devoid of substance, they are accordingly overruled with costs

Application dismissed without costs

Appeal allowed and order that the appellants be released from prison forthwith if no other justifiable cause holds them therein.

Appeal dismiss it in its entirety

Application for reference devoid of merit and it is hereby dismissed with costs.

invoke revisional powers under rule 4(2) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 and revise the judgments and proceedings of both the District Court and the High Court, set aside the judgments of the two courts below, quash the proceedings thereof and restore the decision of the primary court

Appeal is struck out the respondents shall have their costs

Nullify the judgment and proceedings of the High Court and remit the record thereof for redetermination of appeal before another judge, Since this is an old case, court direct that the rehearing of the appeal be done expeditiously.

In terms of Rule 11 (5) (b) of the Rules, the court order the applicant to deposit with the Registrar of the Court an irrevocable bank guarantee in the sum of USD 357,926.061, the intended bank guarantee should be amenable to renewal to cover the whole period until the pending appeal is determined and it should be deposited within sixty (60) days from the date of this order.

Appeal is accordingly dismissed

Application granted and order that the execution of the Judgment and Decree of the High Court (Land Division) in Land Case No. 60 of 2022 which was delivered on 7th March, 2023, be stayed pending the hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. 800 of 2023 pending in the Court, further order that the applicants should deposit a Bank's Guarantee covering the value of the disputed land to the tune of 5 million Shillings as security for the due performance of the decree within thirty days from the date of the delivery of this Ruling.

Application allowed

In the result, the court satisfied that the appeal is meritorious and thus allowed with costs. Consequently, quash the impugned judgment and decree and set aside the orders issued by the trial court.

Appeal is partly allowed to the extent shown herein above. In the circumstances and from the fact that the appeal arose from a labour dispute, we make no order as to costs.

Application granted

Appeal allowed, for that reason, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence, order the immediate release of the appellant if he is not in custody for some other lawful cause.

Appellant shall remain in custody awaiting his trial, unless admitted on bail

Application fails and is accordingly dismissed with costs.

Appeal allowed the appellant's conviction is quashed and the sentence meted out to him is set aside, henceforth, order the immediate release of the appellant from prison if he is not otherwise retained for some other lawful cause

Appeal allowed

Allow the appellants' appeal in its entirety, further proceed to order the appellants to be released from prison forthwith unless they are otherwise lawfully held.

Second ground of appeal has merit allow it to that extent with costs.

Appeal allowed, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence and the appellant be immediately set free unless held for some other lawful cause.

During the pendency of the impending appeal, the applicants should not do anything that will dissipate the value of the bank guarantee issued as security

Appeal without merit and, it is accordingly dismissed with costs.

Application lacks merit and dismiss it with cost.

Appeal No. 619 of 2022 allowed to the extent indicated and strike out Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2023

Appeal allowed on the strength of the third ground

Appeal is dismissed in its entirety, for lack of merit.

Appeal allowed, quash conviction and set aside the appellant's death sentence, immediate release of the appellant from prison unless held for other lawful cause.

Quashed the conviction and set aside the sentence awarded to the appellant, and order his immediate release from prison unless lawfully held.

Appellant's appeal allowed, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence of thirty (30) years imposed upon the appellant further make an order of the immediate release of the appellant, John Mohamed, from prison unless he is otherwise lawfully held.

Appeal allowed, quash the judgment of both lower courts and set aside the sentence imposed on the appellant, order the appellant's immediate release if he is not being held in custody for some other lawful cause.

Appellant may re-file his suit in the Commercial Division of the High Court as per clause 14 of the Loan Facility Letter if he so wishes. Under the circumstances of this matter, we make no order as to costs.

Quashed the judgments and set aside the orders, we remit the record to the trial Tribunal for it to conduct an expedited retrial according to law.

Law reform recommendation

Appeal is strike out

Aappeal allowed, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence imposed on the appellant, order that the appellant be set at liberty forthwith unless he is held for some other lawful cause.

Court partly allow the appeal and the result effect is that, we quash the conviction and set aside the sentence imposed upon the appellant and the compensation order for payment of TZS. lm to each victim. We further make an order of the immediate release of the appellant, Ibrahim Eston, from prison unless he is otherwise lawfully held.

Appeal dismissed in its entirety

Application granted and order the applicant within fourteen (14) days to file the intended written submissions.

Appeal allowed, consequently quash the conviction, set aside the sentence and the subsequent order made thereof, further make an order that the appellant be immediately set free unless held for some other lawful cause.

Invoke our revisional jurisdiction under section 4(2) of the AJA, quash and set aside the trial proceedings subsequent to the amendment order dated 7/2/2019, the impugned judgment and subsequent orders, further direct that, the case file be returned to the High Court for it to conduct an expedited trial given that the case file has been in the court corridors for the past 24 years.

Execution of the Award in Execution No. 12 of 2024 pending before the Land and Housing Tribunal at Chato is hereby stayed pending hearing and determination of the intended appeal on condition that; the applicants execute within fourteen days from the date of delivery of this ruling, a written bond undertaking to vacate from the suit land as ordered by the High Court in case the appeal is not decided in their favour.

Coss-appeal is partly allowed

n pursuance of section 4 (2) of the AJA, quash all proceedings in Matrimonial Cross -Appeal No. 30 of 2020, set aside the resultant judgment and decree, on the other hand, quash all the proceedings in Matrimonial Appeal No. 24 of 2020 from 18 November, 2020 and set aside judgment and the resultant decree, going forward, direct that the record in from which Matrimonial Appeal No. 24 of 2020 emanated shall be expeditiously remitted to the High Court with a view to a hearing of that appeal afresh upon the respondent re- filing her cross-appeal in that file not later than 30 days from the date of this ruling.

The Court find merit in the sole ground of appeal and proceed to allow the appeal, consequently nullify the proceedings before the CMA and the decision thereon. Furthermore, quash the judgment of the High Court.

Appeal succeeds to the extent stated, it being a matter falling within the realm of labour disputes, which, ordinarily, in terms of rule 51(1) 21 of the Labour Court Rules, 2007 - GN No. 106 of 2007.

Appeal Struck out with costs

Application is unfounded and thus dismissed it with costs.

Appeal fails in its entirety and is accordingly dismissed

Application with no merit and dismissed it with costs.

Application struck out each party shall bear its costs

Dismissed the second respondent's preliminary objection

In the end, the court substitute the sentence imposed for a sentence that will allow the 1st and 2nd appellants to be released immediately from imprisonment unless otherwise held for other lawful purposes. All in all, the court dismiss the appeal, save for the sentence which we have substituted as stated herein.

Appeal allowed, consequently, nullify and quash the judgment of the trial court in Civil Case No. 10 of 2013 dated 6th November, 2020 and set aside the decree thereof, accordingly, order the case file to be remitted to the trial court for it to compose a fresh judgment in accordance with law.

Hearing of the appeal is adjourned to a date to be fixed by the Registrar.

immediate release of the appellants from prison unless they are lawfully held.

Strike out the appeal with costs for being time barred

For the avoidance of doubts, nullify the proceedings, quash the judgment and set aside the sentence, order the record to be remitted to the High Court for a retrial according to law, meanwhile the appellant shall remain in custody.

Appellant's appeal allowed, quash his conviction and set aside the custodial sentence imposed on him, proceed to order his immediate release from prison forthwith, unless held for some other lawful cause.

Appeal is without any merit and it is hereby dismissed.

Appeal is meritorious and allowed, consequently, quash the appellants' convictions and set aside the sentences thereof, further order for the immediate release of the appellants from prison unless they are otherwise held for other lawful purposes.

Appellant was properly convicted on his own plea of guilty and was also properly sentenced, the appeal is without merit and is hereby dismissed in its entirety.

Appeal has no merit and it is dismissed in its entirety.

Application is found to be meritorious and granted

Appeal allowed , quash conviction of murder against the appellant and set aside the sentence of death passed, and substitute for a conviction of manslaughter.

Appeal allowed, quash the appellant's conviction and set aside the sentence meted out on him by the trial court and subsequently sustained by the first appellate court. We order for the appellant's immediate release from prison if he is not otherwise detained for some other lawful cause.

Appeal lacking in merit and proceed to dismiss it in its entirety.

It is partly allow the appeal, quash the conviction of murder and substitute it with the conviction of manslaughter, accordingly, set aside the sentence of death by hanging imposed by the trial court to the appellant, considering the circumstances pertaining to the killing of the deceased, and the period that the appellant has been in custody, impose a term of imprisonment of fifteen years from the date of the appellant's conviction, that is, 8th July, 2022.

In the final analysis, we decline to exercise our discretion in favour of the applicants, as we maintain that the matter at hand does not reveal any justifiable grounds for the delay in filing the amended record of appeal. Consequently, we dismiss the application with costs.

Appellant's conviction and sentence were well-grounded and we find nothing on which to fault the concurrent finding of the two lower courts, accordingly, the court find the appeal barren of fruits and we dismiss it in its entirety.

Preliminary objection is overruled with costs.

Appellant shall be released forthwith from custody unless lawfully held therein

Since the applicant bears the burden of proof, it is upon him to clear the doubts as regards the two stories told by the two affidavits, this he has not been able to do the affidavit which was served on the respondent contradicts the one on record and since this fact was raised in the affidavit in reply, it is not extraneous, the court hold that the application is incompetent for being supported by an untrue affidavit.

The Court do not find cogent reasons to disturb the concurrent findings of the two courts as such uphold the conviction and sentence of the appellant and proceed to dismiss the appeal in its entirety.

Appeal allowed the appeal thereby quash the appellants' conviction and set aside the sentences meted against them. We order their release from prison forthwith unless held for other lawful cause(s).

Quash the proceedings before the High Court as well as the judgment, and set aside the resultant orders

No merit in the appellant's appeal, henceforth dismiss it with costs.

Appeal partly allowed

Appeal partly is allowed

Appeal, therefore, has merit and it is allowed, consequently quash the conviction and set aside the sentence imposed against the appellant further order for his immediate release from custody unless therein withheld for other lawful reasons.

Appeal struck out

Allow the second appellant's appeal and order his immediate release from prison if he is not otherwise being held lawfully.

The sentence of thirty years imprisonment is quashed and substituted with that of fifteen years' imprisonment, appeal partly allowed.

Appeal allowed, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence. We further order the immediate release of the appellant from prison unless he is otherwise lawfully held.

Stay execution of the decree of the High Court of Tanzania at Moshi in Land Case No. 10 of 2016 dated 08/06/2017 on condition that the applicant puts in the Court a Certificate of Title for such a plot as promised with at least half value of the disputed land immediately.

Appeal allowed, quash the convictions and set aside the sentence the appellants be immediately set free unless held for some other lawful cause.

Appeal granted

Appeal has no merit and it is dismissed it with costs

Appeal strike out l with no order as to costs.

Appeal is thus dismissed with costs

Application is unmerited and stands dismissed.

Nullify the proceedings and judgment of the Tribunal and that of the High Court

Appellant committed the offence with which he stood charged, the sentence of life imprisonment meted out on him was the minimum sentence prescribed by law and, therefore the position taken by the learned Judge is consistent with the facts of the case and the law. we have no reason to interfere with it, the net result of what we have said is that, we find no merit in this appeal which we accordingly dismiss in its entirety.

Appeal is devoid of merit, accordingly, dismiss it

Appeal dismiss it on its entirety

Appeal is allowed, conviction quashed and sentence set aside. The appellants are to be set at liberty forthwith, unless otherwise lawfully held.

Appeal is struck out and the decision of the High Court nullifying the award of the CMA

In the circumstances, we remain with no option other than agreeing with Ms. Makala that, having discarded the evidence of PW1, the remaining evidence on record is insufficient to sustain the appellant's conviction, it follows therefore that, the case against the appellant was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, allow the appeal, quash conviction and set aside the appellant's sentence, order immediate release of the appellant from prison unless held therein for a lawful cause.

Application is meritorious, it is granted as prayed, the applicant is given five (5) days reckoned from the date of delivery of this ruling within which to serve the respondent with the memorandum and record of appeal.

Appellant's appeal has no merit and accordingly dismiss it with costs.

No merit in ground one and having so held, the court see no need discussing other grounds which were dependent on the determination of ground one. Consequently, dismiss the appeal for lack of merit. The respondent shall have her costs in this Court and the trial court.

Applicant is granted extension of time to file a notice of appeal within thirty (30) days from the date of delivery of this ruling.

Appeal stands dismissed in ground one nevertheless, in view of the illegality in the determination of ancillary reliefs by both the trial court and the first appellate court, constrained to exercise revisional power under section 4 (2) of the ADA to correct the illegality in the judgments of both courts consequently, quash the orders of division of assets and custody of children made by the first appellate court and the trial court for being a nullity.

Application for reference devoid of merit it is accordingly dismissed with costs

Applicant has not furnished sufficient grounds to warrant review of the decision of the Court in terms of Rule 66 (1) (a) and (b) of the Rules, in the upshot, we find the application to be wanting in merit and we accordingly dismiss it.

Applicant has not accounted for each day of the delay as required and has offended the requirement for a litigant to observe the time schedule for the taking of steps in judicial proceedings, accordingly proceed to dismiss the application with cost for the reasons stated above.

Appellant be released from prison forthwith unless he is otherwise lawfully held

Application is granted

Applicant did not demonstrate any good cause that would entitle her to the sought extension, in the result, the application is not merited it is accordingly dismissed in its entirety.

In terms of section 4 (2) of the AJA, we quash the proceedings and resultant judgments of both lower courts set aside the sentences meted out against the appellants and order for an expedited retrial before another magistrate with competent jurisdiction.

Application struck out with costs.

Appeal to have no merit and dismiss it in its entirety

Appeal allowed, nullify the proceedings and judgment, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence by the trial court, do the same to the proceedings and judgment of the High Court sustaining the trial court's decision, hereby order the appellant to be released from prison forthwith if not held therein for any other justifiable cause.

strike it out each party shall bear his own costs.

Application be stayed

The proceedings and the judgment of the High Court in Economic Case No. 3 of 2021 are nullified, the conviction and sentences meted to the appellants are vacated and set aside and direct the case to be heard afresh by another Judge of competent jurisdiction after receiving the consent from the DPP on the offence charged. The appeal is allowed to the extent.

Invoke the provision of section 4(2) of the ADA to revise and nullify the proceedings of the District Court of Magu dated 21st October, 2016 and those of the High Court in Criminal Sessions Case No. 163 of 2016, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence. emit the case file in PI Case No. 38 of 2014 to the District Court of Magu to conduct fresh committal proceedings before another magistrate as soon as practicable, further order that, the appellant should remain in custody pending the holding of fresh committal proceedings.

Appellants be released forthwith from prison, unless they be held there for other lawful cause.

Since the finding disposes of the appeal, the court see no compelling reasons to consider the remaining grounds of appeal raised by the appellant. In the event, and for the foregoing reasons, the court hereby dismiss the appeal in its entirety with costs.

The court accordingly, invoke revisonal powers under section 4(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act and set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court and nullify the proceedings thereof, further direct that the record be remitted to the trial court for trial before another judge after the Rungwe District Council had been joined as a party.

Application strike out with costs

Application fails and is dismissed

Appeal partly succeeds to the extent of the fourth and fifth grounds and fails to the extent of the first, second and third grounds, vary the judgment of the first appellate court so that the appellant's appeal thereat is dismissed to the extent of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd grounds and allowed to the extent of the 4th and 5th grounds. The awards of 40% value of the motor vehicle and possession of the two machines are quashed and set aside.

Appeal is not meritorious and we accordingly dismiss it in its entirety.

Application is thus, hereby granted

Reference is unmerited, it stands dismissed.

Appeal succeeds to the extent of the fourth and fifth grounds and it is hereby allowed

Allow the first ground of appeal and hold that, the prosecution case was not proved beyond reasonable doubt

Appeal is struck out with cost

Revision granted

Strike out the notice of appeal lodged by the respondent

Appeal succeeds

Application for review granted

Court find merit in the appeal which accordingly allow, order for the immediate release of the appellants from prison if they are not otherwise detained for some other lawful cause.

Court satisfied that the prosecution case was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, allow the appeal, quash conviction and set aside the life imprisonment sentence imposed on the appellant, order his immediate release from prison unless otherwise he is lawfully held.

Appeal allowed, quash the appellant's convictions and set aside the sentences imposed on all counts by the trial court and sustained by the High court, order that he be set free forthwith if not held for any justifiable cause.

Invoke revision powers under section 4 (2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act [CAP 141 R.E.2019] and hereby quash and set aside the trial proceedings and the impugned judgment together with the subsequent orders, direct the case file to be returned to the High Court for an expedited trial prior to which parties should be required to amend the pleadings and join the Registrar.

Appeal allowed and quash the appellant's conviction, set aside his sentence of death; and finally order his immediate release from prison, unless he is held there for any other lawful cause

Appeal allowed, conviction for the offence of murder is thus quashed and the sentence meted out thereat is accordingly set aside, in the end order the immediate release of the appellant, if not lawfully held for some other causes.

Application is allowed

On the way forward, taking into account the circumstances of this case, we are of the firm view that justice demands that the appellant be set free unless otherwise held for lawful purposes.

Applicant has failed to comply with the two conditions listed under rule 11 (5) of the Rules, cumulatively. Consequently, for above given reasons, the appiication is accordingly dismissed with costs.

General damages arising from the appellant's act of unlawfully evicting the 1st respondent and her children thereby causing them mental anguish and inconvenience, the amount of TZS 30,000,000.00 will meet the justice of the case, therefore, reduce the amount of the general damages awarded by the trial court to the above stated amount. The amount shall attract interest at the court's rate of 7% from the date of the trial court's judgment to the date of full payment this is in accordance with Order XX rule 21 of the Civil Procedure Code, Chapter 33 of the Revised Laws.

Application granted with costs

Appeal unmerited, the Court accordingly, dismiss it in its entirely.

Appeal fails in its entirely, thus dismissed.

Appeal is dismissed in its entirety with costs

Appeal dismissed with costs

Court find merit in the appeal and we allow it. Accordingly, quash the conviction, set aside the sentence and order that the appellant be immediately set free unless held for some other lawful cause.

Appellant shall remain in custody pending retrial before a competent court, further order that, should the appellant be found guilty and convicted, the served time in jail should be included in the jail term to be imposed.

Appeal nullified

Appeal is devoid of merit and dismiss it.

Appeal is partly allowed, whereas, the conviction on the second count of unnatural offence is quashed and the respective sentence of life imprisonment is set aside, the conviction on the first count of rape and its respective sentence of thirty (30) years' imprisonment, are sustained.

Reject the applicant's motion for change of panel or for the recusal of one of us because that is against the clear provisions of rule 66 (5) of the Rules

Application for extension of time granted

Appeal allowed, quash conviction and set aside the sentence imposed on the appellant, the appellant should be released from prison forthwith, unless held for other lawful cause.

Appeal allowed, quash the appellant's conviction and set aside the sentence. The appellant should be released from prison forthwith unless he is held for other lawful cause
Alphabet

a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

Sort by:

Title	Date
May 1999
Ndwaty Philemon Ole Saibull vs Solomon Ole Saibull (Civil Appeal 68 of 1998) [1999] TZCA 27 (18 May 1999) Reported	18 May 1999
Ramnik Vaghella vs Mahendra Vaghella (Civil Appeal 32 of 1996) [1999] TZCA 23 (18 May 1999) Reported	18 May 1999
April 1999
Antony Mashenene vs The Republic (Criminal Appeal 188 of 1994) [1999] TZCA 8 (23 April 1999)	23 April 1999
March 1999
Lekengere Faru Parutu Kamunyu and 52 Others vs Minister for Tourism, Natural Resources and Environment & 3 Others (Civil Appeal 53 of 1998) [1999] TZCA 20 (29 March 1999) Reported	29 March 1999
Kennedy Nyambe and Tanzania Zambia Railway Authority (Civil Appeal 1 of 1997) [1999] TZCA 15 (24 March 1999)	24 March 1999
C.7874 D/cpl. Juma Msiwa and Another vs Republic (Criminal Appeal 8 of 1998) [1999] TZCA 34 (16 March 1999) Reported	16 March 1999
Elibariki Mboya vs Amina Abeid (Civil Appeal 54 of 1996) [1999] TZCA 13 (15 March 1999)	15 March 1999
Elibariki Mboya vs Amina Abeid (Civil Appeal 54 of 1996) [1999] TZCA 24 (15 March 1999) Reported	15 March 1999
Badrudin M. Lukmanji vs Ali Alwi Bunamay (Civil Application 13 of 1994) [1999] TZCA 3 (9 March 1999)	9 March 1999
Said Abdallah Alawi vs Zulekha Suleman Alawi and Another (Civil Reference 29 of 1997) [1999] TZCA 31 (9 March 1999) Reported	9 March 1999
Arusha International Conference Center vs Edwin William Shetto (Civil Application 69 of 1998) [1999] TZCA 30 (1 March 1999) Reported	1 March 1999
February 1999
Shani Ayubu vs Ibrahim Osman Mohamed (Civil Application 62 of 1998) [1999] TZCA 2 (23 February 1999)	23 February 1999
December 1998
Cresthale (uk) L.T.D vs Bondeni Seeds L.T.D (Civil Appeal 55 of 1996) [1998] TZCA 9 (17 December 1998) Reported	17 December 1998
Stephen Masato Wasira vs Joseph Sinde Wariona and The Hon. Attorney General (Civil Reference 13 of 1998) [1998] TZCA 19 (17 December 1998)	17 December 1998
Miroslav Katic Vesra and Paladin Ingra vs Ivan Makobrad (Civil Application 66 of 1998) [1998] TZCA 17 (16 December 1998) Reported	16 December 1998
Augustin Lyatonga Mrema vs Donati Mathew Mbwagai and 7 Others (Civil Appeal 29 of 1998) [1998] TZCA 12 (10 December 1998) Reported	10 December 1998
Ivan Makobrad vs Miroslav Katic, Vesna Paladin and Ingra (Civil Reference 9 of 1998) [1998] TZCA 18 (8 December 1998) Reported	8 December 1998
African Trophy Hunting Ltd vs Attorney General and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 25 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 11 (3 December 1998) Reported	3 December 1998
Faizen Enterprises Limited vs Africarriers Limited (Civil Appeal 38 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 13 (3 December 1998) Reported	3 December 1998
Intertec East Africa As vs B & Sd International (Civil Appeal 46 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 14 (3 December 1998) Reported	3 December 1998
Said Omari Kombo vs Republic (Criminal Appeal 37 of 19998) [1998] TZCA 21 (3 December 1998) Reported	3 December 1998
November 1998
Felix Tumbo Kisima vs Tanzania Telecommunication Co. Ltd As A Successor to Tanzania Posts and Telecommunications Corporation (Civil Appeal 12 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 10 (23 November 1998) Reported	23 November 1998
September 1998
Wankira Bethel Mbise and Another vs Kaiku Foya (Civil Application 42 of 1998) [1998] TZCA 16 (30 September 1998) Reported	30 September 1998
July 1998
Director of Public Prosecutions vs Anjelina Ojare (Criminal Appeal 21 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 20 (1 July 1998) Reported	1 July 1998
Nocolaus Nicolaus Kapinga and 4 Others vs The Republic (Criminal Appeal 45 of 1994) [1998] TZCA 3 (1 July 1998)	1 July 1998
May 1998
Shegembe Izengo vs Dima Nholongo (Civil Application 40 of 1995) [1998] TZCA 5 (22 May 1998)	22 May 1998
Sylvester K. Masinde vs Pius C. Msekwa and The Attorney General (Civil Appeal 57 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 15 (12 May 1998) Reported	12 May 1998
April 1998
Halfani Sudi vs Abieza Chichili (Civil Reference 11 of 1996) [1998] TZCA 7 (9 April 1998) Reported	9 April 1998
March 1998
Mohamed Hassan vs Mayasa Mzee and Another (Civil Appeal 4 of 1995) [1998] TZCA 4 (19 March 1998)	19 March 1998
John Mgaya and 4 Others vs Edmund Mjengwa and 6 Others (Criminal Appeal 5 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 8 (16 March 1998) Reported	16 March 1998
Richard William Sawe vs Woitara Richard Sawe (Civil Application 32 of 1994) [1998] TZCA 2 (11 March 1998)	11 March 1998
February 1998
Kiteria Menezes and 33 Othhers vs Afra Engineering Work Ltd and Others (Civil Case 297 of 1997) [1998] TZCA 6 (27 February 1998)	27 February 1998
December 1997
Nur Hussein and Abdikhan Ismail (Civil Application 50 of 1996) [1997] TZCA 57 (23 December 1997)	23 December 1997
Nur Hussein vs Abdikhan Ismail (Civil Application 11 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 67 (23 December 1997)	23 December 1997
Tanzania Portland Cement Co. Ltd vs The Minister for Labour (2) (Civil Application 73 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 92 (18 December 1997)	18 December 1997
Benedict Rugemalira and 2 Others vs Mophamed Versi and 2 Others (Civil Application 67 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 89 (12 December 1997)	12 December 1997
George M. Shambwe vs National Printing Co. Ltd (Civil Application 7 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 62 (12 December 1997)	12 December 1997
National Bank of Commerce vs Walter T. Czurn (Civil Appeal 31 of 1995) [1997] TZCA 47 (12 December 1997)	12 December 1997
National Bank of Commercve vs Walter T. Cruzn (Civil Appeal 31 of 1995) [1997] TZCA 94 (12 December 1997) Reported	12 December 1997
Said Salim Bakhressa vs Ally A. Ngume (Civil Appeal 31 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 48 (12 December 1997)	12 December 1997
Francis M. Njau vs Dar es Salaam City Council (Civil Appeal 28 of 1994) [1997] TZCA 45 (8 December 1997)	8 December 1997
African Tophy Huntingi Ltd vs The Hon. Attorney General and 4 Others (Civil Appeal 25 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 43 (3 December 1997)	3 December 1997
Blue Star Service Station vs Jackson Musset T.A Musseti Enterprises (Civil Application 7 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 96 (1 December 1997) Reported	1 December 1997
November 1997
Said Athumani vs Ndugu Damas (Civil Appeal 35 of 1994) [1997] TZCA 36 (17 November 1997)	17 November 1997
Millan Zinzuades vs Abdul and Another (Civil Application 64 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 85 (3 November 1997)	3 November 1997
October 1997
Leonsi Silayo Ngalai vs Hon. Justine Alfred Salakana and Another (Civil Application 41 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 50 (28 October 1997)	28 October 1997
Leonsi Silayo Ngalai vs Hon. Justine Alfred Salanana and The Another (Civil Application 41 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 79 (28 October 1997)	28 October 1997
Inspector Sadiki and 2 Others and Gerald Nkya (Civil Application 8 of 1996) [1997] TZCA 63 (27 October 1997)	27 October 1997
Umoja Garage vs National Bank of Commerce (Civil Application 27 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 73 (27 October 1997)	27 October 1997
Attorney General vs Said Juma Muslim Shekimweri (Civil Application 45 of 1997) [1997] TZCA 81 (24 October 1997)	24 October 1997