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 of Tanzania allowed an application for extension of time to appeal, finding that alleged illegality in a child custody and parentage ruling justified leave.
The proceedings before the trial court and appellate court were a nullity due to the invalid certificate from the Marriage Reconciliation Board, as the secretary improperly participated and signed, rendering the petition incomplete and incompetent.
Source excerpt
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 alleged illegalities were not apparent on the face of the record and required long drawn argument; thus, they did not constitute sufficient cause for extension of time. The appellant failed to account for each day of delay. The District Court correctly exercised its discretion in refusing the extension.
Source excerpt
The evidence of desertion and denial of conjugal rights was insufficient in duration to warrant a decree of divorce but sufficient for a decree of separation for three years. Custody of the minor child is awarded to the respondent (mother) as it is in the best interests of the child under seven years, with the petitioner to have access and bear maintenance responsibilities. No order is made on division of matrimonial assets due to lack of specific pleading and evidence.
Source excerpt
The appeal was filed beyond the statutory thirty-day period without an application for extension of time; therefore, the High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and it must be struck out as time-barred.
Source excerpt
The trial court correctly found that both parties contributed to the acquisition and improvement of the matrimonial assets during the marriage, including financial, supervisory, and domestic contributions by the respondent. The division of assets, awarding a larger share to the appellant due to higher income, was proper and in accordance with the law.
Source excerpt
The presumption of marriage under section 160 of the Law of Marriage Act does not apply where one party is already married by a monogamous Christian marriage; therefore, the appellant is not entitled to division of matrimonial assets, and the appeal lacks merit.
Source excerpt
Second appeal over division of matrimonial property and contribution. The High Court upheld the lower courts’ allocation and dismissed the appeal with costs.
High Court matrimonial appeal over division of a house, alleged mismanagement, a PCCB-area plot, and child custody. The appeal was dismissed.
Explore more
