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 Court of Appeal allowed a criminal appeal over unlawful possession of government trophy, finding a broken chain of custody, material contradictions, and an unresolved defence.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal for unnatural offence, finding the complainant’s account untrustworthy, with unexplained delay and missing material witnesses.
On first appeal, the High Court held the appellant had proved lawful ownership of the suit land and set aside the tribunal’s decision.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, finding armed robbery was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and quashing the conviction and sentence.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, set aside convictions for stealing, and acquitted the appellants after finding the prosecution failed to call a key material witness.
Court of Appeal allowed a rape appeal after finding a material variance between the charge date and the evidence, and an unexplained failure to call a key witness.
The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt as the conviction was based solely on the uncorroborated evidence of a single witness (PW2), with no testimony from the victim or medical doctor, and the key documentary evidence (PF3 and confession) was expunged. Suspicion alone cannot sustain a conviction.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed a robbery appeal, quashed the conviction and sentence, and held that delay in arrest, missing investigator evidence, and weak identification created doubt.
The appellants were sufficiently identified through credible evidence of recognition, the variance in the size of the television was minor and not prejudicial, and the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. The failure to call certain witnesses was not fatal as their absence did not leave a gap in the prosecution's case.
Source excerpt
The court found that the victim had sufficient opportunity to observe and identify the appellant, minor contradictions and variances in evidence did not go to the root of the case, the identification parade was not prejudicial, the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the trial court's failure to consider the defence was cured by the appellate court's own evaluation. The conviction and sentence were upheld.
Source excerpt
Explore more
