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 right to appeal against an ex parte judgment is automatic under section 70(2) of the Civil Procedure Code and is not dependent on first seeking to set aside the ex parte judgment. Therefore, the application for extension of time to appeal is competent and the preliminary objection lacks merit.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances or explain why he did not appeal; the application for revision was incompetent as revision jurisdiction cannot be invoked as an alternative to appeal.
Source excerpt
The appellant's plea of guilty was unequivocal, clear, and unambiguous; therefore, no appeal is allowed except as to extent or legality of sentence. Failure to tender exhibits or cautioned statement does not vitiate proceedings when plea is unequivocal.
Source excerpt
The applicants failed to demonstrate differential treatment or manifest error in the application of law or evidence by national courts. The burden of proof was correctly applied, and the applicants had access to remedies. No violation of Article 3 of the African Charter was established.
Source excerpt
Revision is not maintainable where a right of appeal exists and no exceptional circumstances are demonstrated; applicant misconceived the procedure.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal, holding that the appellant’s guilty plea was unequivocal and that the conviction and sentence should stand.
The High Court refused to extend time for filing an appeal, finding the applicant had not shown sufficient cause for the delay.
Applicant demonstrated good cause for delay due to circumstances beyond his control, specifically misplacement of documents by prison authorities and lack of access to legal services, warranting extension of time to appeal.
Source excerpt
The appellant's plea was imperfect and unfinished due to inconsistencies in the facts, lack of clarity in the plea, and failure to properly admit the essential elements of the offence. The trial court erred in treating the plea as unequivocal and convicting the appellant on that basis.
Source excerpt
The Court found that the applicants' rights to a fair trial and equality before the law were not violated, as the Tanzanian judicial system provided for appeal to the highest court, the evidence was duly considered by national courts, no unequal treatment was established, and the need for an interpreter was not communicated. The exhaustion of domestic remedies requirement was satisfied as applicants had appealed to the highest court and were not required to pursue extraordinary remedies.
Source excerpt
Explore more
