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 partly quashed a tribunal decision that declared the respondent owner of a disputed house, but upheld dismissal of the appellant’s claim.
The trial court erred in failing to determine the status of Plot No. 207 Block B at Mbweni Malindi as a matrimonial property, as the existence of a pending High Court case did not oust its jurisdiction. Upon re-evaluation of evidence, the plot was found to be the appellant's sole property, not a matrimonial asset. The Ford Ranger vehicle, acquired during marriage, was deemed a matrimonial property and awarded to the appellant. Other properties were distributed as per the trial court's decision.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal correctly held it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute as the property had already been determined as matrimonial property by a competent court, and the appellant conceded the relevant facts by failing to rebut the respondents' averments; the doctrine of stare decisis was properly applied.
Source excerpt
The second respondent, not being a party to the original suit, was improperly joined, constituting an irregularity that undermines the application. The preliminary objection on improper joinder is upheld, and the application is dismissed without addressing other objections.
Source excerpt
The High Court quashed a consent decree from the Ubungo Land and Housing Tribunal for denying the applicant a hearing over property linked to matrimonial proceedings.
Appellant failed to prove contribution to acquisition or improvement of matrimonial assets; assets were acquired prior to marriage; lower courts correctly applied law and evidence; no miscarriage of justice found.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a second appeal over division of matrimonial property, holding that the lower courts properly assessed the appellant’s contribution and that she had already received her share.
The applicant, not being a party to the matrimonial proceedings and having no established interest before the District Court, cannot invoke revisionary jurisdiction to challenge the division of property. Ownership disputes over the farm must be adjudicated in a competent land court, not through revision of matrimonial proceedings. The application is not maintainable.
Source excerpt
The appellant's domestic work and small business activities during the marriage constitute contributions to matrimonial assets under the Law of Marriage Act, but the appellant failed to provide concrete evidence of the extent of her contribution; thus, the award of Tsh. 5,000,000/- as her share is upheld.
Source excerpt
The applicant was not negligent, complied with court orders, and attended all sessions. The court's scheduling order was general and did not specify that the preliminary objection be argued first. The right to be heard was not accorded, and the improper citation was a minor error not affecting competence. Restoration is warranted.
Source excerpt
Explore more
