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 suit is res judicata as all conditions are met: same parties, same subject matter, same cause of action, and the previous decision was final and by a competent court. The issue of ownership has already been determined and cannot be re-litigated.
Source excerpt
The application before the trial tribunal was incompetent for failing to sufficiently describe the suit property, rendering any decree inexecutive and the proceedings a nullity. This defect was fatal and dispositive of the appeal.
Source excerpt
The High Court struck out a labour application for delivery of possession after finding non-citation of enabling provisions and a fatal inconsistency in the land description.
The applicant lacks locus standi as administrator due to expiry of statutory period for administration; property description is insufficient for injunction; application struck out.
Source excerpt
Failure to disclose when the cause of action arose and to provide a sufficient description of the suit land are fatal defects under the Civil Procedure Code, rendering the plaint incompetent and liable to be struck out.
Source excerpt
The description of the suit land in paragraph 3 of the plaint is sufficient for identification purposes, and thus the plaint discloses a cause of action. The preliminary objections lack legal merit and are overruled.
Source excerpt
The High Court overruled all preliminary objections, holding that the plaint sufficiently identified the land, non-joinder of the seller was not fatal, and injunction prayers were not improperly included.
The proceedings were vitiated by failure to properly tender the ward tribunal's certificate and by inconsistent and insufficient description of the disputed land, depriving the tribunal of jurisdiction and rendering its decree unworkable.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a land ownership claim for insufficient proof of title and land description, and declared the 2nd defendant owner of the disputed plot.
The trial Tribunal failed to provide a clear and proper description of the disputed property, leading to ambiguity and potential unenforceability of its orders. The matter requires additional evidence to confirm the location and description of the property before a final judgment can be rendered.
Source excerpt
Explore more
