hidaya shukuru vs joyce joseph 5 others 2022 tzhclandd 15706 28 march 2022

hidaya shukuru vs joyce joseph 5 others 2022 tzhclandd 15706 28 march 2022

Respondents, as trespassers, are not entitled to compensation for improvements made on the land, and the trial tribunal erred in awarding such compensation without a pleaded counterclaim or evidential basis.

Citation
hidaya shukuru vs joyce joseph 5 others 2022 tzhclandd 15706 28 march 2022
Parties
Appellant: Hidaya Shukuru; 1st Respondent: Joyce Joseph; 2nd Respondent: Ally Mohamed Mkala; 3rd Respondent: Zainabu Abdallah Msekela; 4th Respondent: Robert Edward Maswanya; 5th Respondent: Michael Maziku; 6th Respondent: Nassoro Khamis Ahmed
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
28 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Land Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed to the extent explained; judgment, decree, and proceedings of the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Ilala quashed and set aside; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Ownership of Land, Trespass, Compensation for Improvements, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Land Law Ownership of Land Trespass Compensation for Improvements Burden of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hidaya Shukuru

Appellant

Joyce Joseph

1st Respondent

Ally Mohamed Mkala

2nd Respondent

Zainabu Abdallah Msekela

3rd Respondent

Robert Edward Maswanya

4th Respondent

Michael Maziku

5th Respondent

Nassoro Khamis Ahmed

6th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Land Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial tribunal erred in ordering the appellant to pay compensation for improvements to respondents deemed to be trespassers
  2. 2 Whether compensation can be awarded to illegal occupiers of land

Ratio Decidendi

Respondents, as trespassers, are not entitled to compensation for improvements made on the land, and the trial tribunal erred in awarding such compensation without a pleaded counterclaim or evidential basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed to the extent explained; judgment, decree, and proceedings of the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Ilala quashed and set aside; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Judgment, decree, and proceedings of the District Land and Housing Tribunal for Ilala quashed and set aside
  • No order as to costs