Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The High Court dismissed an appeal over unpaid agency commission, holding the appellant bore the burden on client payment and that no prejudice arose from lack of Kiswahili translation.
The Ward Tribunal of Kibamba had jurisdiction to determine the dispute as it was a minor land dispute arising from a licence to cultivate, not a complex matter involving a grant of right of occupancy. The limitation period began in 1996/1997 when adverse possession arose, not from the original grant in 1982, so the claim was not time barred. The appellant should have appealed the Ward Tribunal's decision rather than filing a fresh case in the Primary Court. The District Court was correct in nullifying the Primary Court proceedings and upholding the Ward Tribunal's decision.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed an appeal challenging revision proceedings, holding that a misnomer was curable, the probate file was closed, and dowry refund was barred by statute.
The High Court entered a consent judgment after the parties settled. The defendants will pay TZS 92 million, and the plaintiff abandoned a prior TASAC award.
The High Court allowed a civil appeal, quashed damages awarded for destroyed mango trees, and held the respondent had not proved the claim to the required standard.
The respondent failed to prove the claim on the balance of probabilities, did not establish specific damages, and lacked proper corporate authorization to institute the suit, rendering the lower courts' decisions unsustainable.
Source excerpt
High Court civil appeal on crop-damage damages was allowed, with the trial court’s award restored after the District Court’s reversal was quashed.
The court held that Application No. 62 of 2023 was res judicata to Application No. 249 of 2019 and Land Appeal No. 66 of 2021 because the subject matter, parties (including privies), and issues had been conclusively determined by a competent court, and the doctrine of res judicata precluded re-litigation. The previous appeal had determined ownership on the merits, and the addition or removal of parties did not alter the application of res judicata.
Source excerpt
The dispute was purely civil in nature and not criminal; the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter as a criminal case without exhaustion of civil remedies, rendering the conviction and sentence invalid.
Source excerpt
The subject matter of the dispute was land, not merely breach of contract, and thus the primary court lacked jurisdiction to determine the matter.
Source excerpt
Explore more
