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 application for mandamus and certiorari against the Tanganyika Law Society, finding no proven denial of access to documents and no impugned decision.
The adjournments dated 13.1.2025 and 17.1.2025 in bail proceedings were unjustifiable in terms of span and reasons, violating the applicant's right to timely justice. The High Court has jurisdiction to revise such proceedings even absent a final decision, and directs expeditious determination of bail objections.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to establish an arguable case because he did not provide the alleged resignation letter or sufficient proof of its effectiveness. Without this critical document, the court could not determine whether there was a genuine and justiciable issue warranting judicial intervention. Judicial review is discretionary and requires clear, sufficient grounds, which were not met in this application.
Source excerpt
The applicant satisfied all six legal criteria for leave to apply for judicial review, including establishment of a prima facie case, sufficient interest, timely filing, decision by a public body, exhaustion of remedies, and good faith. The compounding order is final and unappealable, making judicial review the appropriate remedy.
Source excerpt
High Court at Mwanza dismissed all preliminary objections in a judicial review leave application by a TLS council member seeking mandamus and certiorari.
The preliminary objection was dismissed because the decision to compound offences is criminal in nature and not a civil dispute within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Tax Revenue Appeals Board. The High Court retains jurisdiction to entertain applications for judicial review of such administrative actions, notwithstanding statutory finality clauses.
Source excerpt
The application is time-barred as it was filed more than six months after the accrual of cause of action, which occurred on 15 October 2021. Rule 6 of the Law Reform (Fatal Accidents and Miscellaneous Provisions) (Judicial Review Procedure and Fees) Rules, 2014, mandates dismissal of applications filed out of time. The doctrine of continuing breach does not apply; refusal to pay terminal benefits was a single act. Annexures may be considered at the preliminary objection stage.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a second appeal, holding that the respondents sued the wrong party and should have challenged the Regional Commissioner’s order by judicial review.
The application is not barred by res judicata as the prior case involved different parties and issues, and was not conclusive of the present matter. The applicant has locus standi, filed within time, and established an arguable case. Certiorari is a sufficient remedy at this stage. Leave is therefore granted.
Source excerpt
The applicant demonstrated locus standi, timely filing, sufficient interest, and a prima facie case; thus, leave to apply for judicial review is granted.
Source excerpt
Explore more
