N
Appellant's liability is established by preponderance of evidence and failure to disprove paternity; compensation is justified.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- N
- Parties
- Appellant: Appellant (schoolteacher); Respondent: Respondent (father of pupil)
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Liability for Pregnancy, Compensation for Harm, Misrepresentation
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Appellant (schoolteacher)
Appellant
Respondent (father of pupil)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant is liable for impregnating the respondent's daughter
- 2 Whether compensation is justified based on evidence
Ratio Decidendi
Appellant's liability is established by preponderance of evidence and failure to disprove paternity; compensation is justified.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appellant to pay costs
- Judgment to be conveyed to MHAICCourt Singyanga
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
. ., .... .. .. 4T. •r~BO:-tA . .--~- :.,·: ·9 .OF lj~,. ~-- .j· Dis·rrUCT COU.dT ... .i . ;CIVIL 1 I • . ?TO 9 OF l~ , "• ao) \·,· .. , I.ii:,~i qr(! . ~ • •.. · ~ • ". o • o .-~ • -~-- • • "· • • o o o () 0 o 4 •• ·-APP.EL·L AI~T ·°lersus (Or1 6iual tl1::spondent) ,HJDG3IV!Zl\f T Tbe a;~._,,;,el_l_3._p/, a_ 1.s.cr;ooteacl1er , was su€.:: ~J t11e respondent for ·making his ;;mrpil,.· ~eJ b.,:1u:· ,. J.) •• ·......,_ \' ' -· ' .:../o M:-,__g,::i_tl/~~t th~ rGspondent'.~- iaughter, p regnan te TLtl ·it··.:~~.1i.~/f:rim;,~:; Co.ur_t 11~.u: ao d.iff icul ty i~·; u~_~olding the respondent's claimii~; view of the preponderance of eviden~e . . t ·e against the q,P1>0lian to ;i Bdefly, the facts vJti:i.ch have C'?,me out in tLe course of this case v:ere ths.t tt3 qppellant befrien'dcd. D.-,_L,. 1v~:ile sr..s was ·his purpil at Buk.,.,,..,i Prim~.ry Sci,oula .\ 1,tJ<i,rently t.hes he.a. sevcrg,J, amorous encounters bofor-.• th.a On hearing th3,t 1.such. ,-i3,s t!Je :c::tse ti10 A,ppel:'..a.1H stA,rted in!:l.king ,, arrangemc,nt.3 to minimi;:::~ tLe uffectc of his :nisd.GmE.anour~ He called the pupil at his Lome ~Hi_ w~ ilG his wife W<>.8 uor.10 distance in the 1 kitchen he beseeched un.1. )1p il to help him prGserve his career by n naming another pDrson ~~ I ·d,o 9.u.thor of her progn::i,ncyo He woud marry her in returnc ;\,, f' . . ·~e ',wo.u.ld l1RVG it the pup::.l .iuly implicat,ed one KasL.i.lje by writing hem ,'1- letLr w:_icl1'· s!.:o' q,rra,ngea. to fa.11 into the hands of the 3c!:uul ,,,utli.o ...'itieso She -;;;-Jon i)Urportod: to ;::i,dmit·having ·,· been made pregnt:.nt by K?:shi,nje to har un.cl0~ one S~i..u.. She wuut further and re3istered Kh,Si,.injo ::.t the clin.ic c1,c the f'3-ther of her . ,l expected chiidc: , All this, howaver, did,, not fool the rea~ondent who went ahead and succeeded to clair.i 5 ! 1:c~da, of c9.ttl0 9.S compensation from the appellant. Tllc tria.l court allowed the claim with one voice as they were fully justified to do. 1:- The Di..,trict M"'gistr:;te who heard the aP.,_al -•CJ' . ■h-keA . ~by .~h• -'. oopi_o1.1a . .. 1~~biase. :tb'3:. -~peilan_t ~ . , :~~plo,ved . JL . . ' 0 •.•••• 0 0 0 / 2.. to impeach the Itwa,ng Prim~.t'Y Court. , 0"1 tb.:, guest~on whether the appellant's liability should be rev1:: :~seJ 011 the g;r©und. that the • : • • ·-:-.:: ., ·'. . ,.J pupil mistakenly deacrib_ed him as circ.imsised 9 tb!:1 -.:3,p)e'3.l magistrate abserved:- •. •-! .. , ; ~ { : ... · 11 .U c_hi. wa ;r1;.-Jq,nci,ur.i·e ukisimarr!q, · gov-i ),.:a,zima : uri;.di nyum;:,, 9 .a~, 'kwakiiw'3. kr1.ti/:;:."3. shauri. . ',: .;. . . r hili 3.fiq,J-J~UGi kg, ni' insich¥--':l- r.1_;~ _hq,Kuol-GW:i • f' :• 11 q muo:n l:., "l. ruf a.1 i "\us sm ~ k.u 'N~ i,,JqJUek·'l?: ':'.)'rif-10 j P. ·· nq q,S3'N'J zq, kumuoni:,. nchi W,9,ka: bil::i, kus{mq.ma ni a/laj'. at-Jr.:b~_,:i_ ."l,,._/c -h~<.~t,-,,Liri,-Jg,,i 11 In his memo r'J.nd.i;:,r:i 9 ti~., ·a...?)e_ll-:i,.~ t tai:os i.3 ,ue vJi th the•'.:fin:dings of fact which two courts have so f_:,,r fou..'1,d h9ca,u.se to disoolieve • . :-~~>L ·J'~'- ·_· ..... ~ His insi5tence tt13. t .:1e W8,S mist,1,k~nly'· d::f~1•i h::;d_'-·As ci r::m.msi sed while-'.h_e in f;,,ct hac::. ::i, ::oreskin c8,fir_•)'t_r.ol_d w3,t,ar, in ,,_;:,·m:.ich as _he ' .. . ' ' ' did no.t_ di.spla3,· ~1i3 ?:riv<?.,t0 p3,rts -to_ tho ·trb.'.l. court for vorific;:i,tion of \ ·.. ·,. ' . . ··, his coiitentiono, The ::i,~)Gll~,nt conv:::nbntl_y f8-ile..:i. to_.:?.how to th1:; same •.,, • ...._~I.-,.• •• court eith•er t ..at K.,.:;:linj.e_vJ;:i,s cr:rc:..wnoiscd_. ... H.j.s liability.. i's··-t-J;nj~::~.· . . a matte·r of .certai.ntj. even_. witii~lit •111.ri.if b,&",-,l ~.~ovfsion unj_er G.N. -;;~:-·:::~79 of 1965 th:ct the mA,I'. ns,mod by 'l. ~ornyt -~s i;,hj -:l~_t}~or ,of h,0r·p;agn~6y -is held to be sue:·. unl·Jc·:·t.2. t-.:Tb~ld p'~·0ve_ . ,·:;i-J:, .co.'.i·tr;:-.ryJ _ _1-!is \ppea1 .. . . , ' . . ' .- .. · :, ·: thus l~cks me.ri t 8,,"ld it _i·s hereby dismissed ;-,i't~: ·dost-E!.,, :•~Th,is- judgemarit'· is t0 ~-e cortv:e1ed tC> tl·1-, M-:HAIC.CDur~-~ Siiinyanga~ ··. ;- •,\· I 0·. :, CTING JTJDGE~ '· . _I·. V, ;·:·.' ....,. ,. : _;, !· .,.,'\.