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 TLS public statement does not bind its members in their professional conduct or create a conflict of interest that would disqualify them from representing the accused; the right to legal representation is constitutional and cannot be ousted by such a statement; no illegality, impropriety, or irregularity was disclosed to warrant revision or disqualification.
Source excerpt
The High Court in Mwanza warned an advocate for relying on improper service and reminded parties to use authorized court brokers and process servers.
The composition and quorum requirements of the National Advocates Committee, as stipulated in section 4(5) of the Advocates Act, create a real danger of bias when the Attorney General is the complainant and the Deputy Attorney General and Director of Public Prosecutions are also conflicted. However, this situation is case-specific and does not render the statutory provisions unconstitutional in general. The anomaly can be addressed administratively, and alternative mechanisms exist under the Tanganyika Law Society (Ethics) Regulation, 2022.
Source excerpt
The Taxing Officer committed procedural errors by raising and determining extraneous issues without giving parties a chance to respond, issuing contradictory orders, failing to address all issues raised, and not adequately considering the applicant's evidence, thereby undermining procedural fairness and the right to be heard.
Source excerpt
The omission to attach the High Court order refusing leave was an accidental lapse referenced in the affidavit, and in the interests of substantive justice and under the overriding objective principle, the applicants are granted leave to file a supplementary affidavit within thirty days to cure the defect, rather than striking out the application.
Source excerpt
An advocate who attests a document that is central to the pleadings and may be called as a witness is conflicted and must be disqualified from acting as advocate in the same matter to avoid embarrassment and preserve the integrity of proceedings, as per Section 7 of Cap 12 R.E. 2019 and Regulation 45 of G.N. 118 of 2018.
Source excerpt
Plaintiff's advocate Daniel Weiwei is disqualified due to conflict of interest arising from attesting a document central to the suit, as there is a real possibility he may be called as a witness, and the law prohibits an advocate from acting in such circumstances to avoid embarrassment and protect the integrity of proceedings.
Source excerpt
Proceedings and judgments in which a party is represented by an unqualified person purporting to be an advocate are a nullity, regardless of the parties' knowledge or subsequent punishment of the impostor. The court must nullify such proceedings to uphold the law and the integrity of the judicial process.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to account for all days of delay, and the alleged illegality was not apparent on the face of the record but required long argument. There was no sufficient cause for extension of time, and the grounds for leave to appeal were hypothetical and not arguable. Both applications lacked merit and were dismissed.
Source excerpt
Leave to appeal cannot be granted on issues not determined by the High Court; applicants failed to establish any arguable issue arising from the High Court's decision to warrant leave to appeal.
Source excerpt
Explore more
