Tanzania Case Law

Paschal Shitunga Ruling

Court

TANZLII

The applicant failed to account for most of the delay, and ignorance of law is not a sufficient reason. However, the inclusion of a new charge (participation in political activities) by the appellate authority, which was not part of the original charges and on which the applicant was not heard, constitutes an apparent illegality on the face of the record. This illegality is sufficient ground to grant extension of time to apply for leave for judicial review.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Judicial review
• Employment termination
• Illegality as ground for extension
• Limitation period

Read case analysis

MSAFIRI Ruling Final

Court

TANZLII

The applicant materially breached clause No. 12 of the employment contract by using another client’s account to bill orders for unqualified customers, exposing the respondent to business risk and tax implications. The procedure for termination was followed, the applicant was notified and heard, and the sanction imposed was justified. The award of the CMA was properly procured.

Source excerpt

• Employment termination
• Fixed-term contract
• Disciplinary procedure
• Breach of contract
• Electronic evidence

Read case analysis

Judgment JOYCE JOHN ILOMO v DAR CERAMICA CENTRE

Court

TANZLII

The High Court upheld a CMA award dismissing a labour revision over alleged psychological injury after non-renewal of employment, finding no proved causal link or legitimate expectation.

• Tortious liability
• Psychological injury
• Employment termination
• Jurisdiction of cma
• Legitimate expectation
• Breach of contract

Read case analysis

MOSES DAUDI EXTENSION OF TIME

Court

TANZLII

The High Court at Shinyanga granted Moses Daudi extension of time to file labour revision, finding the 12-day delay explained and the alleged illegality arguable.

• Extension of time
• Right to be heard
• Illegality as ground for extension
• Delay in filing revision
• Employment termination
• Extension-of-time

Read case analysis

ELIGIUS MUTASHOBYA BAGENYI VS CHIEF SECRETARY

Court

TANZLII

The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, did not account for all days of delay, and did not establish that the ruling and drawn order were necessary prerequisites for filing the application for judicial review. The law does not require attachment of the ruling or drawn order, and the applicant's inaction and negligence do not justify extension of time.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Judicial review
• Certiorari
• Limitation periods
• Employment termination

Read case analysis

SAMU SECURICOR INTERNATIONAL LABOUR SALARY ARREARS 22

Court

TANZLII

The High Court dismissed a labour revision challenge and upheld a CMA award for salary arrears, holding that the statutory minimum wage bound the employer.

• Minimum wage
• Salary arrears
• Employment termination
• Revision of arbitration award
• Labour-law
• Minimum-wage

Read case analysis

Baraka Ruling

Court

TANZLII

The applicant established sufficient cause for extension of time based on substantiated illness and technical delay, and raised a tenable issue of illegality. The delay was not due to negligence or apathy, and the applicant diligently pursued his rights. The court found the reasons advanced to be sufficient and excusable, warranting the grant of extension of time.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Judicial review
• Illegality as ground for extension
• Technical delay
• Employment termination

Read case analysis

BENEDICT IHUYA MAYENGA

Court

TANZLII

The High Court in Mwanza dismissed an application to extend time for judicial review over termination of employment, finding the applicant failed to account for 33 days of delay.

• Extension of time
• Judicial review
• Employment termination
• Sufficient cause
• Technical delay
• Financial constraints

Read case analysis

sebastian deogratius kajula vs simon groupshamba africa 2024 tzca 83 22 february 2024

Court

TZCA

The appellant failed to provide a detailed and reasonable explanation covering the entire period of delay in referring his grievances to the CMA. Mere reference to ongoing negotiations and a payment made during that period did not suffice to establish good cause for condonation. Pre-court negotiations do not suspend limitation periods, and the appellant did not account for each day of delay as required by law.

Source excerpt

• Condonation for late filing
• Limitation period
• Employment termination
• Right to be heard

Read case analysis

JOHN PAUL NDANSHAU V

Court

TANZLII

The delay was technical, not actual, as the applicant filed previous applications within time but they were withdrawn or struck out for procedural reasons. The applicant accounted for the delay and acted promptly. Technical delay is a recognized ground for extension of time. The application is allowed and the applicant is granted seven days to file the intended revision.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Technical delay
• Employment termination
• Revision of arbitral award

Read case analysis