Tanzania Case Law

LABOUR APPEAL NO 25400 NO 2023 JUMA B SWEID VRS THE REGISTRAR OF ORGANIZATIONS

Court

TANZLII

The appeal was dismissed because POSWUTA failed to meet the statutory requirements for registration as a trade union: not all founding members were employees, and no valid establishment meeting was held as required by law. The Registrar lawfully refused registration, the appellants were afforded the right to be heard but declined, and the delay in decision-making did not invalidate the Registrar's decision.

Source excerpt

• Trade union registration
• Right to be heard
• Employment status
• Procedural fairness

Read case analysis

gm dewji and co ltd vs mathias john mwimbilizye 3 others 2022 tzhcld 715 28 july 2022

Court

TANZLII

The High Court quashed a CMA award, finding no sufficient proof that vehicle brake failure caused the accident or that the claimants were employees.

• Employer's liability
• Negligence
• Employment status
• Compensation for workplace injury and death
• Labour-law
• Tort-law

Read case analysis

pm group tanzania limited vs jenifer akisofrey mugeni suing as administratrix of the estates of late ulrich rudolf rudolf eckret 2022 tzhcld 705 30 june 2022

Court

TANZLII

The respondent was not an employee but a contractor under a management contract; CMA lacked jurisdiction as no employer-employee relationship existed; proceedings and award are quashed and set aside.

Source excerpt

• Employment status
• Jurisdiction of cma
• Contract interpretation
• Unfair termination

Read case analysis

patrick mbombo vs dkt international tanzania 2020 tzhcld 206 2 june 2020

Court

TANZLII

The High Court quashed the CMA award and dismissed a labour revision, holding that the applicant was engaged under a consultancy agreement, not as an employee.

• Consultancy agreement
• Employment status
• Termination of contract
• Jurisdiction of elra
• Procedural fairness
• Labour-law

Read case analysis

20140714 TZCA Dar es Salaam

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal dismissed Stella Temu’s review application, holding that the grounds raised were appeal grounds, not proper review grounds under Rule 66.

• Review of appellate decisions
• Employment status
• Jurisdiction of appellate court
• Appellate-review
• Employment-law
• Civil-procedure

Read case analysis

cleophas m motiba others vs the principal secretary ministry of finance others 2010 tzca 159 30 december 2010

Court

TZCA

The appellants were not employees of the Tanzania Revenue Authority at the material time, as there was no evidence of government appointment or direct transfer under the Establishment Circular. They remained employees of the Ministry of Finance and were lawfully removed in public interest by the President under section 19(3) of the Civil Service Act. Due process was followed, reasons were provided, and the removal did not constitute punishment.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful termination
• Public interest removal
• Employment status
• Delegation of authority
• Procedural fairness

Read case analysis

20101008 TZCA Dar es Salaam

Court

TZCA

Appellants were not employees of the Tanzania Revenue Authority at the material time as there was no evidence of government appointment or direct transfer under the Establishment Circular. Their removal in public interest was lawfully executed by the President under section 19(3) of the Civil Service Act, with reasons provided and due process followed. The High Court did not err in its findings except for taking judicial notice of the appointment date of the Commissioner General without proper basis, which did not affect the outcome.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful termination
• Public interest removal
• Employment status
• Delegation of authority
• Due process in public service

Read case analysis

cleophas m motiba others vs the principle secretary ministry of finance others 2010 tzca 115 8 october 2010

Court

TZCA

The appellants were not employees of the Tanzania Revenue Authority at the material time, as there was no evidence of government appointment or direct transfer under the Establishment Circular. They remained employees of the Ministry of Finance and were lawfully removed in public interest by the President under section 19(3) of the Civil Service Act. Due process was followed, reasons were provided, and the removal did not constitute punishment. The High Court's findings were justified except for reliance on personal research regarding the appointment date of the Commissioner General of TRA.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful termination
• Public interest removal
• Employment status
• Delegation of authority
• Due process in public service

Read case analysis

hildegard vogt vs venant peter mpunga 2006 tzhc 273 18 july 2006

Court

TZHC

There was no partnership agreement, express or implied, between the parties; respondent was an employee, not a partner, as evidenced by employment records, salary payments, and legal ineligibility to own a dispensary; trial court erred in law and fact by finding a partnership and awarding profit share; trial magistrate exhibited bias and improper conduct, further invalidating the judgment.

Source excerpt

• Partnership formation
• Employment status
• Business ownership
• Judicial impartiality

Read case analysis

20050921 TZHC Dar es Salaam

Court

TZHC

The trial court correctly dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdiction as the appellant failed to provide a labour officer's certificate showing he was in management and thus outside the Security of Employment Act, 1964. The civil court was not the proper forum for the dispute, and the appeal was properly dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Summary dismissal
• Labour disputes
• Certification of decree
• Employment status

Read case analysis