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 respondent failed to advance sufficient and tangible grounds to justify recusal; allegations of bias are trivial, unsupported, and do not meet the legal test for judicial disqualification. Recusal would encourage forum shopping and undermine judicial function.
Source excerpt
The Court is functus officio regarding the issue of whether the application is interlocutory, as the matter was finally determined by a fellow judge in a previous proceeding involving the same parties. Therefore, the current judge must recuse himself and allow another judge to determine the application on its merits.
Source excerpt
The application for stay of execution is granted because the applicants met all statutory conditions: the application was filed within time, substantial loss was demonstrated, and a sufficient undertaking for security was given. The High Court order is executable as it grants rights and directs actions affecting the applicants. The respondents' claim of bias was unfounded and did not meet the legal threshold for recusal.
Source excerpt
The defendant failed to advance sufficient or convincing grounds for recusal as required by law and judicial ethics; mere dissatisfaction with judicial orders or unsubstantiated allegations do not warrant recusal.
Source excerpt
An order refusing recusal is interlocutory and does not finally determine the suit; therefore, it is not subject to revision under section 79(2) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Source excerpt
Criminal appeal over stealing by agent partly allowed only on sentence. Conviction was upheld, but imprisonment was reduced from five years to three years.
The Court of Appeal refused to vary the review panel, holding that objections to a Justice's earlier participation were raised too late and that rule 66(5) should be followed.
The High Court rejected a recusal request, holding that the allegations of bias were vague, unsupported, and did not meet the test for apprehension of bias.
The High Court partly allowed the appeal, finding the original damages award for farm destruction was overstated and substituting TShs. 6,000,000 instead.
The Court of Appeal held that judicial recusal may occur even after hearing a matter, but late recusal after long delay was improper; the record was remitted for reassignment.
Explore more
