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 execution tribunal erred in refusing to execute the decree on grounds of insufficient description of the subject matter, as it had no jurisdiction to question or go behind the decree issued by the trial tribunal. The execution court's role is limited to executing the decree as issued, unless set aside or varied by a superior court.
Source excerpt
The High Court quashed a land tribunal's refusal to execute its earlier order, holding the applicant was entitled to enforcement of the unchallenged judgment.
The applicant was not denied the right to be heard as he was afforded full opportunity to present his case in the prior appeal; the Court is not required to recall parties to address laws or authorities it may rely upon; and the grounds raised by the applicant are not proper grounds for review but rather grounds of appeal, which is not available as the Court of Appeal is the final court.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed a review application, holding that the challenged ground of appeal had already been considered and no manifest error was shown.
The High Court dismissed a land appeal as an abuse of process, holding the dispute was already finally determined in earlier proceedings involving the appellants’ mother.
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed an application to extend time for a second review, holding that the Rules bar a second review in the same matter.
Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed a review application, holding there was no error apparent on the face of the record and the issues raised were not for review.
The Court of Appeal struck out a review application, holding that the applicants were trying to re-open an appeal rather than meet the narrow grounds for review.
The Court of Appeal dismissed a review application, holding that the complaints were attempts to re-argue decided issues and not manifest errors on the record.
The applicant's complaints do not amount to manifest errors on the face of the record as required under Rule 66(1)(a) of the Court of Appeal Rules. The issues raised were already determined in the appeal and require re-examination of evidence, which is outside the scope of review jurisdiction. Review is not a substitute for appeal, and the application is an abuse of process.
Source excerpt
Explore more
