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 upheld a land tribunal ruling that the disputed house formed part of the late Amin Muhitu Kangamoto’s estate and dismissed the appeal.
The High Court struck out a land revision application as incompetent because the supporting affidavits were fatally defective, containing hearsay and undisclosed sources.
The respondent's evidence was based on expunged exhibits and hearsay, failing the burden of proof. The appellants' evidence was stronger and supported by direct witnesses and valid documents. The DLHT's decision was quashed and the appeal allowed.
Source excerpt
The only evidence linking the appellant to the offence was that of the victim (PW2), which was found not credible due to contradictions, lack of timely disclosure, and circumstances casting doubt on her testimony. The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction and sentence were quashed and the appellant was ordered to be released.
Source excerpt
The appeal was allowed because the evidence presented by the 1st respondent was hearsay and inadmissible, as his agent could not testify on his behalf. The trial tribunal's decision was reversed since the appellant's claim stood uncontested by direct evidence, and the sale of land by the 2nd respondent to the appellant was upheld as lawful.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal against arson convictions, quashing the convictions and setting aside the sentences after finding the evidence insufficient.
The affidavit supporting the application was defective as it was based entirely on information supplied by the applicants and not within the advocate's personal knowledge, contrary to established legal principles. The application, being supported by a defective affidavit, is incompetent and must be struck out.
Source excerpt
The respondent's possession and use of the disputed land since 1998 without interruption satisfied the requirements for adverse possession, and the evidence relied upon by the trial tribunal was not hearsay as the respondent testified in person. The tribunal properly evaluated the evidence and reached a correct conclusion.
Source excerpt
The respondents provided heavier and more credible evidence that the land in dispute was distributed to them by the deceased during his lifetime, and they have possessed and used the land for over 20 years. The doctrine of adverse possession applies. The appellant failed to prove his case on the balance of probability. The certificate of occupancy in the appellant's name was improperly obtained as the land was not his personal property but part of the deceased's estate.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to prove the offence of cattle theft beyond reasonable doubt as the evidence was largely hearsay, there was no direct evidence of theft, and the defense explanation was plausible. The conviction was unsafe and the appellant was entitled to acquittal.
Source excerpt
Explore more
