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 limitation period for filing an application for stay of execution begins from the date the applicants were served with notice of execution or became aware of the execution application. The applicants were notified via newspaper on 17 March 2020, and the application was filed on 6 May 2024, well beyond the 60-day limitation period. The application is therefore time-barred and must be struck out.
Source excerpt
The District Court did not disregard the issue of illegality and properly exercised its discretion in dismissing the application for extension of time. The appellants had been afforded the opportunity to be heard during execution proceedings, and the eviction order was a matter of enforcing previously determined rights. Rule 58 was not violated, and the claim of illegality was unsubstantiated.
Source excerpt
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the application to lift the eviction order because the matter is pending before the Court of Appeal and the law does not permit the High Court to intervene once appeal proceedings have commenced.
Source excerpt
The High Court set aside an eviction order in execution, holding that execution must stay within the decree’s terms and cannot add relief not granted.
The land was jointly owned by the appellant and respondent, the execution order did not exceed the decree, and the property was sufficiently described; the appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal granted a stay of execution pending appeal, holding that the decree was executable and that the applicant met the rule 11 conditions.
The trial magistrate erred by failing to determine the preliminary objection before addressing the merits, lacked jurisdiction to vacate the eviction order after issuing it, and wrongly allowed the respondent to remain in the property despite the attachment and sale orders remaining intact. The proper remedy for the respondent is to file a separate suit to establish ownership.
Source excerpt
The High Court judge exceeded his mandate by addressing and nullifying the eviction order and lease agreement, which were not matters for determination in the application for temporary injunction; such issues should be determined in the main suit, not at the interlocutory stage.
Source excerpt
The High Court revised tribunal proceedings, set aside irregular stay-of-execution orders, and directed immediate execution of the eviction decree.
High Court revision of a contempt conviction from a magistrate’s court. The conviction was quashed after the court found a reasonable apprehension of bias.
Explore more
