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 dismissed a judicial review leave application as time-barred, finding it was filed well outside the six-month limit after the President’s decision.
The High Court struck out a joint judicial review leave application by three former Tanzania Railways employees, holding their separate disciplinary histories created no joint interest.
The High Court struck out a judicial review application as time barred because it was filed outside the 14-day period after leave was granted.
The applicant failed to account for most of the delay, and ignorance of law is not a sufficient reason. However, the inclusion of a new charge (participation in political activities) by the appellate authority, which was not part of the original charges and on which the applicant was not heard, constitutes an apparent illegality on the face of the record. This illegality is sufficient ground to grant extension of time to apply for leave for judicial review.
Source excerpt
The High Court struck out an application for judicial review because the applicant sought prerogative orders without first obtaining leave, as required by rule 5(1).
The High Court granted leave to seek judicial review after finding an arguable complaint about alleged denial of fair hearing in a teacher’s termination.
The High Court declined to intervene in the pending proceedings of the trial court, holding that the trial court has jurisdiction to determine the legality and propriety of the charge and that there was no irregularity or illegality in the trial court proceedings. The application was premature and not properly filed.
Source excerpt
Applicant demonstrated an arguable issue regarding whether preliminary inquiry under Police General Orders was conducted prior to disciplinary proceedings; leave to file judicial review is granted.
Source excerpt
The application was struck out as premature because the applicants failed to exhaust the alternative remedy of requisitioning a general meeting under section 22 of the Tanganyika Law Society Act. The court found the statutory mechanism to be effective and speedy, and no sufficient evidence was provided to show it was unavailable or ineffective. The court did not address the remaining objections as the first objection was dispositive.
Source excerpt
The petition is struck out as it is vexatious and frivolous; the prayers sought challenge the government's actions in introducing legislation, not the constitutionality of an Act of Parliament, and such redress is unattainable in a constitutional petition. This defect alone is sufficient to dispose of the petition without addressing the remaining preliminary objections.
Source excerpt
Explore more
