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
Applicant failed to establish a strong prima facie case, ongoing or imminent threat to property, or irreparable loss not compensable by damages. Respondents' evidence was uncontroverted. Public interest in use of the road outweighs applicant's individual interest. All conditions for mareva injunction were not met.
Source excerpt
The High Court Land Division dismissed an application to maintain status quo over land alleged to have been sold, finding no prima facie case or irreparable loss.
The High Court granted an interlocutory order for release of a fuel consignment, finding the applicant had shown a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favored relief.
Failure to specify the relevant sub-rules or subsections of the cited enabling provisions renders the application incompetent and liable to be struck out.
Source excerpt
The court found a prima facie case exists due to the pending dispute over ownership of the suit property, and that the property and its rental proceeds are inseparable. Preserving rental proceeds in escrow is necessary to protect the interests of beneficiaries and prevent misuse pending determination of the main suit. The balance of convenience favors the applicant and beneficiaries, justifying the grant of the application.
Source excerpt
The High Court Commercial Division ordered the 3rd respondent to appear and show cause after funds were debited under a letter of credit despite an earlier restraint order.
The High Court vacated an ex parte interim injunction issued by the District Land and Housing Tribunal for procedural irregularities and improper tribunal composition.
The applicant failed to demonstrate irreparable injury or a prima facie case warranting an interlocutory injunction. The court has jurisdiction to interpret alleged violations of the Treaty, but the application did not meet the threshold for injunctive relief. The supporting affidavit's minor defect did not render the application incompetent. No restraining orders were justified as the EPA process was not imminent and the Summit had already paused further signatures.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed an application for interim restraint orders over land premises, holding that triable issues existed but irreparable harm and balance of convenience were not shown.
The High Court held that a withdrawn interlocutory commercial application should bear costs, applying the general rule that costs follow the event.
Explore more
