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 has jurisdiction to entertain the suit for defamation where only general damages are claimed, due to the proviso introduced in section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code by the 2016 amendment, rendering objections based on lack of specific damages redundant.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a civil appeal over alleged unauthorized use of a photograph in commercial advertising, holding the appellant failed to prove the claim.
The High Court allowed a civil appeal in a defamation matter, holding that the respondent had not pleaded the specific defamatory words or proved publication to a third party.
The High Court allowed an appeal in a defamation suit, finding the pleaded words and trial evidence materially differed and the respondent failed to prove defamatory publication.
The High Court at Shinyanga recorded a consent judgment settling a defamation suit and adopted the parties’ deed of settlement as the decree.
The High Court allowed a defamation appeal, finding the respondent’s words about the appellant were published publicly and harmed his reputation.
Second appeal in a family defamation dispute dismissed for lack of proof of defamatory injury and actual damages arising from the alleged word 'tapeli'.
The appellant failed to prove on balance of probabilities that the respondent owed and breached a duty of care, or that the breach caused actionable injury. The evidence did not substantiate the claims, and the burden of proof was not discharged.
Source excerpt
The trial court's omission to record assessors' qualifications was not fatal; the court had pecuniary jurisdiction based on the pleaded claim; the publication was defamatory in its plain and ordinary meaning; the respondent suffered damages; the trial judge obtained and considered assessors' opinions; however, the trial judge erred by considering inflation, which was not pleaded or evidenced, in assessing damages. The award was reduced to the amount pleaded and proved.
Source excerpt
The suit is time-barred as it was filed after the aggregate limitation period (original plus permissible extension) expired. The Minister's extension beyond the statutory maximum was ultra vires and ineffectual. Legal disability was not pleaded as a ground for exemption in the Plaint and cannot be raised by submissions. Since limitation goes to jurisdiction, the suit is dismissed.
Source excerpt
Explore more
