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
Interrogatories that are relevant to the facts in issue, do not constitute exclusive evidence of the respondent, are not scandalous, and are not confidential communications should be allowed. The applicant is entitled to deliver such interrogatories to the respondent, except those found to be vague, overbroad, or seeking exclusive evidence.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a commercial suit for want of prosecution after finding the plaintiff had not complied with a discovery order.
The High Court at Mwanza dismissed an application for leave to appeal, holding the intended appeal was improper because the revision order was procedural and did not finally determine the case.
The High Court dismissed an application to depart from a scheduling order and seek interrogatories and discovery, finding the requests too general and not bona fide.
The interrogatories for which further answers are sought improperly seek to extract evidence that the respondents will rely on at trial, rather than facts material to the issues in dispute. Such interrogatories are not permissible, and no further answers are required.
Source excerpt
The interrogatories for which further answers were sought extended to seeking evidence the respondents would use at trial, rather than facts material to the issues. Such interrogatories are not permissible, and no further answers are required.
Source excerpt
The interrogatories for which further answers were sought extended to seeking evidence that the respondents would rely on at trial, which is not permissible. Therefore, the answers provided, though objected to, were sufficient in law, and no further answers are required.
Source excerpt
The High Court Commercial Division granted leave for interrogatories, finding they were necessary, relevant, and likely to save time and costs.
The interrogatories sought are necessary for the fair and expedient disposal of the case and do not amount to a fishing enquiry; therefore, leave is granted for their delivery.
Source excerpt
The application for interrogatories was rejected because the proposed questions were unnecessary, repetitive, and amounted to an impermissible fishing expedition for the defendant's benefit. The court held that duress is a matter of law and fact to be proved by the plaintiff, and the defendant already had access to potential witnesses. The proper means for clarification was cross-examination, not interrogatories.
Source excerpt
Explore more
