N
- Citation
- N
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TZHC
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TZHC
- Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found the respondent liable for adultery based on the preponderance of evidence and upheld the district court's finding.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Respondent held liable for adultery
- Respondent ordered to compensate appellant
02
Material facts
Parties
Appellant
AppellantRespondent
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the respondent committed adultery with the appellant's wife
- 02
Whether the respondent is liable to compensate the appellant for adultery
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The appellant alleged that the respondent committed adultery with his wife and sought compensation for the marital wrong.
- Respondent
- The respondent attempted to escape liability, but the evidence established his wrongdoing.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
District Court decision
Liability for adultery is based on preponderance of evidence.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found the respondent liable for adultery based on the preponderance of evidence and upheld the district court's finding.
Court disposition
appeal dismissed
- Respondent held liable for adultery
- Respondent ordered to compensate appellant
Source and reliance status
TZHC
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TZHC
Judgment
· IN THE HIGH COURT OF T AN~ANIA h! ·.x A:PcflBA • (PC) crvr:rJ ;\PPEAL no. 1 OF 1Sf30 ( From t:1e doci si on of tho bistri ct Court pf Shiny!).Ilis':i. 3t Shiny-.<1.t:.r,;'.J. Civil l1rre1.l No 25 OF 1979L versus ·-------- JTJD11MF.NT KWIKIMA, Art;.~ The rwrellqnt, d resident of Lri-;rrn'l vill1.r:;o Mw$1ashele, left his Jhooe only to find his vvifo aw3.y ,:inr1 the children alone on his retur.n.., Be 'lPD'1rently ::mt out 'l~~iin in se'lrch for his wife. As luck would have i t 9 he suy,ris,J: the rospondcnt in fla,i_:;rqnt e wit Jr~ :1i s vvi f E: 0 T heii· rJnc: .) ZV;US v·r,i] tho school shamba. Tho ~1:;::::r,ollr.int -thw:.rtc'L th2 rcs~L~.onlcrrt 's attempt to escnre fron the scunco r:i:hc -~r'l'li tional rilb.rD 'I\T'1S r:3.ised people no rer3.sonQblcJ c,,us:; chos~: to int2rforc, with th,} consistent view th.1.t th,:; resrr)ff1cnt h·1.: indo:;(l wr·onr;cYl the 'J.Proll:1nt and wns li8.blc t:o cor.ipensate hioo T~0 ·:ill J-:'.'.C":. net of 3,dultery Co ,.;pl,C'lined ill ,·;. 01~ ·,l\,~.,.c:: ,_ I'. ·ut -1.J o r7- ,)uht ~ "1 •J,) th .L:c; . ·1 af1{?; '.l.I'I)f.;'°:!., r1 i· S t ra t 8 i· n a manner defyin:S; ler-;9.l ro1.sonirt-'s,, Dospit e st reno us ef.fort ' . to find f3.ult 'Ni t:1 th::: t:ci-:i.l court 9s fin.1ing, the r:i.p1rnal court justific:::1tion. for interferinr; with tt::: crir:in1.l findint:s• liability wns on thu :,r·eponlcnr'lnco of cvi,1cnce; Gstablished
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.