19791107 TZHC Dar es Salaam

'L6'thDL putz (t)Li7 s/o seaicotcTIe ol. sepço pXOM pçAoxd o tzp tq.& pxo tmoo atq. uo sum WUTTaddu ot toq UO i:tItzpUt St t0ns $pIm Vr1.a2:ts IlTp.trc4sqns q4.p ppAoad .ou srm asuo jTuqs $T4 paqq. ptrr soeCqo UT.0rz4Sq 9nOeUtrfl0SttL tfl3 sexoq Tool. Sq pepoq SlTul4avd stpt ssaoov ;o stxut e. si& ipitIM 9S09 &fl OIOAt &otxe;.o 9Tlq4 ;o s.xtnoq..id et L6dtO çL Ptr (j7)I7 9/0 WeuL&otduI& .to; eo'aid es pttt sseoa o smetz 4e;s aptAoJcI O. rflt1; tA pemt.3 qunoo pue aqq. UT •tttoo.x —3jlOM e. 30 $T 1. 8M We &ZTU 0 aLll, 110 aqnIUnOO O. .Sflp 9UWd ptn Ave poito - p. rc J9M eouo;;o etq jo san3q.zr3d aul L6?thD JO j. pui (t)cT 8/0 SUTTm0T0 JO o.iqs Tic sasitie.xd £xo.o; e dea o. RUTTTuJ t{qIM po2?.itq3 Dunoo eq. uo sum q-I s.tmoo .mo; t.ti'A perto SflM Smdmoo o. uol3ood8uI STtq. Jo t$.I eta. su pUI 6L61 43]\J t6. 110 PaTSTA StA 0.0J Otli suosad fl Znoqu paodwo st pu-e DUT31JOM poot put 2uTTTTm mii u-c rcp Ludmoo ssetrjsnq v s eso sTt. UT Zwe -E-Eaddu etj ouewes iedth T1t3 ST sc.ia - If 'VHOIIitDI liNDCfl2 -. - L6 0 th3 D CL pu ()ct 9/0 sstrçueto o etis u-c sesTuIe.xd tooti;•et. doe o. DtrrTTv,,ff .IoqnooS —°': r9uTwo) : 1*1 NIErcIMoasai •••' .•f DI'IEIlaH 3i111 (posnooIr ttU12tr0) : vuiaav I ' ' ' • HONIS irirr HDI 5- NVHSIE 'alilmIlisIovw liDIHliSIE SSV1IO 'IliVHSIOVW ''bsa 'oiin •a'o nodxa. iliflSI)1 1iv liDIUliSI wvv'ivs sa va: tO liO3 li3IHli5I 1i ao I 6L6t ao i'tzt ION rvaav TNINIHD liEQOD HDIH • H -- I - : FffvTis sa va tiv zNoliunooHoIHaHliNI . A /yjt7 ---i The particulars of his offence were that the' appellant did not provide adequate and suitable facilities for working for his employees. It was on the fourth count charged with failing to provide accommodation for clothing c/s 47 and 73 Cap. 397. The particulars of this offence were that the appellant did not provide adequate and suitable accommodation for clothing not worn by employees during working hours. The appellant pleaded guilty to all the four counts and was fined shs.400/= jndefauit 14 days imprisonment for each count. The fine was paid. The appeal is on three grounds viz: (i) "That the sentences on all four counts are too excessive for the reason that the directjoxof the Labour Officer were carried out immediately," "That it is impossible to keep the workshop neat and clean all the time as we.are timber and wood furnitire makers and when the workshop is in use there is bound to be saw dust all around and on the ceiling of the workshop etc. which is cleaned after closing hours of the workshop and more particularly at the week- ends". "There are always working facilities for the staff working there but sometimes there is too low water pressure and at times there is no water at all this is a common occurrence in Dar es Salacm flowday5,l The State Attorney, Mrs. Suleiman, who appeared in this case agreed with the appellan1in e circumstaricesfrhich the offences were convicted, the punishment imposed on the appellant was too severe. The appellant had no previous convictions under Cap 297. I agree with both the appellant and the State Attorney that the punishment imposed on the appellant was too..severe. A warning or a token sine would have cuff iced in this case. The appeal is therefore allowed. The sentences imposed by the trial count are set aside and are substituted with sentences of shs.50/ for each count. It is ordered that the appellant be refunded the access fine that he has paid. Delivered in open court this 7th day of Noveraber, 1979. M. P. KNmicIa JUDGE