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The High Court refused bail pending appeal, holding that the applicant’s medical evidence was outdated and unsupported by prison records showing inability to treat him in custody.
No exceptional or unusual circumstances demonstrated; presumption of innocence inapplicable post-conviction; family dependency and alleged sickness insufficient; no substantiated defect in charge; granting bail would jeopardise justice.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances or explain why he did not appeal; the application for revision was incompetent as revision jurisdiction cannot be invoked as an alternative to appeal.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying the invocation of the Court's revisional jurisdiction; the proper remedy was appeal or rectification before the High Court.
Source excerpt
The applicant had an absolute right of appeal and failed to demonstrate any exceptional circumstances to justify invoking the revisional jurisdiction of the court; therefore, the application for revision is incompetent and bad in law.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed an application for bail pending appeal, holding that the applicant had not shown exceptional circumstances, and that the medical material and dependency claims were insufficient.
The applicant failed to demonstrate any exceptional or unusual circumstances, such as substantiated ill health or old age, to justify the grant of bail pending appeal under Rule 11(2) of the Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed an application for bail pending appeal, holding that ill health, age, and related claims were not sufficiently proved.
The High Court dismissed an application to set aside a summary judgment, holding that the applicant failed to show exceptional circumstances under Order XXXV Rule 8.
The Court found that the applicants' inability to submit evidence was due to exceptional circumstances, including lack of access caused by incarceration, unnotified prison transfers, and COVID-19 restrictions, justifying reopening deliberations and admitting new evidence.
Source excerpt
Explore more
