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 application for stay of execution was misconceived because there was no evidence that the respondent had initiated execution proceedings or obtained an execution order; thus, there was no basis for granting a stay.
Source excerpt
The applicant complied with the requirements of rule 11 of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009, including timely filing, provision of necessary documents, and a firm undertaking to provide security. The Court found merit in the application and granted a stay of execution pending appeal, subject to conditions regarding security.
Source excerpt
The application for stay of execution is granted because all mandatory conditions under Rule 11 of the Court of Appeal Rules were cumulatively fulfilled, including timely filing, demonstration of potential substantial loss, provision of necessary documents, and undertaking to furnish security.
Source excerpt
The High Court Land Division granted Asha Ali Omary more time to file a notice of appeal and seek leave to appeal, relying on alleged illegality and jurisdictional concerns.
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania granted a stay of execution pending appeal, finding the applicant proved substantial loss and offered security as required by the Rules.
The High Court dismissed an application for stay of execution pending appeal, finding the applicant had not shown sufficient cause, irreparable loss, or a favorable balance of convenience.
Court of Appeal dismissed an application for stay of execution for failure to show substantial loss and to furnish security under Rule 11(2).
The Court of Appeal granted a conditional stay of execution, finding substantial loss, prompt filing, and a firm undertaking to provide security.
The Court found that the respondent State violated the applicant's right to legal assistance under Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter, as interpreted with Article 14(3)(d) of the ICCPR, by failing to provide free legal aid in a serious criminal case where the applicant was indigent. Other alleged violations, including denial of fair trial, procedural irregularities, and undue delay, were not established. The applicant was awarded compensation for moral damages only.
Source excerpt
The High Court quashed an unconfirmed deportation notice against Josephine Wegesa Mkono, holding certiorari appropriate because no appeal lay under the Immigration Act.
Explore more
