Tanzania Case Law

MWACOTRA RULING 1 1

Court

TANZLII

The Court is functus officio regarding the prayer for appointment of a Court broker, as the same relief was previously sought and denied in earlier proceedings between the same parties. The application is also barred by res judicata and issue estoppel. Additionally, the applicant's failure to file a counter affidavit constitutes admission of the respondents' compliance with the Court order, eliminating any factual dispute and rendering the application meritless.

Source excerpt

• Execution of court orders
• Functus officio
• Res judicata
• Issue estoppel
• Appointment of court broker
• Compliance with injunction

Read case analysis

zihja selemani muhema vs mkombozi commercial bank 5 others 2024 tzhclandd 48 16 february 2024

Court

TANZLII

The High Court Land Division dismissed an application for a mareva injunction, holding it was functus officio because the land dispute had already been settled by consent judgment.

• Mareva injunction
• Functus officio
• Consent judgment
• Execution of court orders
• Mareva-injunction
• Functus-officio

Read case analysis

oc 1 mnyukwa CIVIL APPEAL NO

Court

TANZLII

The respondent complied with the maintenance order as evidenced by unchallenged counter affidavit and proof of payment; appellant's application for execution lacked merit and was properly dismissed by the trial court.

Source excerpt

• Maintenance of children
• Execution of court orders
• Appeals

Read case analysis

CIVIL REFERENCE NO 8736 OF 2024

Court

TANZLII

The taxing officer erred by awarding attendance fees in excess of the statutory scale without evidence of longer attendance. The costs order from the main suit was not nullified by the subsequent ruling and remains enforceable. The taxed amount for attendances is reduced to the statutory amount.

Source excerpt

• Taxation of costs
• Advocates remuneration
• Conflict of interest
• Execution of court orders

Read case analysis

HAMISI IDDI DUMA Vs

Court

TANZLII

It was improper for the District Court to strike out the application after hearing it on merit and finding it unmeritorious; the correct procedure was to dismiss the application.

Source excerpt

• Striking out vs dismissal
• Stay of execution
• Jurisdiction
• Execution of court orders

Read case analysis

CIV APP 202402221000003516 GODLIVER JOSEPH VS JAFARI SHARIFU

Court

TANZLII

The 2nd respondent had no legal basis to detain the appellant's properties as the court order for their release was valid and enforceable; any rent claim should be pursued against the 1st respondent, not by detaining the appellant's property.

Source excerpt

• Division of matrimonial property
• Detention of property
• Locus standi
• Execution of court orders

Read case analysis

Prestige v TRA PO

Court

TANZLII

The application is not incompetent for being brought against respondents who were not parties to the original suit or commercial application, but is incompetent for want of issuance of the mandatory 90 days’ statutory notice to the Government under section 6(2) of the Government Proceedings Act, as the application constitutes a suit against a government institution.

Source excerpt

• Execution of court orders
• Notice of intention to sue government
• Joinder of parties
• Jurisdiction

Read case analysis

biko malwata vs saidi ally kikulacho 2023 tzhc 22655 17 november 2023

Court

TZHC

The appellant was not required to file a fresh appeal; the District Court correctly struck out Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 2022 as it was contrary to the High Court's order to hear Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2018 de novo.

Source excerpt

• Criminal trespass
• Appeal procedure
• Execution of court orders

Read case analysis

hobokela fred mwangota another vs augustino mwangota 2023 tzhc 20553 31 august 2023

Court

TZHC

The High Court dismissed an application for contempt over a title deed in a probate dispute, holding the matter had been overtaken by events and was an abuse of process.

• Contempt of court
• Execution of court orders
• Abuse of court process
• Contempt-of-court
• Probate-and-administration
• Abuse-of-process

Read case analysis

Judgment Eustach Sahiro

Court

TANZLII

The application before the District Land and Housing Tribunal was incompetent due to failure to properly describe the suit property as required by mandatory provisions of the Civil Procedure Code and Land Disputes Courts Regulations; all proceedings were a nullity and must be quashed.

Source excerpt

• Description of suit property
• Competency of application
• Jurisdiction
• Execution of court orders

Read case analysis