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 set aside the first appellate court’s judgment, holding that territorial jurisdiction had been found on facts not pleaded or proved in the trial record.
The Dongobesh Primary Court had no jurisdiction to try the claim for malicious prosecution as it was a common law tort, not a customary law tort. The District Court erred in assuming jurisdiction without proper inquiry. The appellant's failure to properly argue his ground of appeal meant there was no valid submission before the High Court.
Source excerpt
The deceased was professing Christianity, as evidenced by Form No. I and undisputed facts regarding his marriage; the trial and appellate courts erred by relying on place of abode and number of wives as proof of customary life. The primary court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the probate and administration cause of the deceased.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that Biharamulo District Court lacked territorial jurisdiction over offences committed in Chato District, quashed the conviction, and ordered a fresh trial in Chato District Court.
The suit is based on breach of contract, not a land dispute involving conflicting claims to rights in land; therefore, the High Court Land Division lacks jurisdiction. The suit was filed in the wrong forum and is untenable.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that the Primary Court lacked jurisdiction over this commercial dispute and nullified the lower court proceedings, judgment, and orders.
The primary court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the tort of malicious prosecution as there are no established and accepted rules regarding such tort under the Haya tribe's customary law, and the matter is not within the scope of primary court jurisdiction under the Magistrates' Courts Act. All proceedings and judgments of the lower courts are nullities.
Source excerpt
The District Land and Housing Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain a dispute arising from a loan agreement secured by land, as the matter was contractual and not a land dispute. All proceedings and orders are void ab initio for want of jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that the Primary Court lacked jurisdiction over a civil claim for compensation tied to developments on land in a deceased’s estate, and quashed the lower-court proceedings.
The District Land and Housing Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to determine the dispute as the parties' relationship and property dispute fell within the purview of matrimonial law, requiring assessment by a matrimonial court under the Law of Marriage Act.
Source excerpt
Explore more
