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 probate court exceeded its jurisdiction by determining the appellant's status as heir; only the administrator has authority to identify heirs. The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The probate court was correct to exclude the Ubungo property from the deceased's estate as there was no evidence it was registered in the deceased's name. The trial court did not usurp the jurisdiction of the land court by making this determination based on title evidence. Procedural errors in filing and affidavit defects did not prejudice the parties or affect the outcome.
Source excerpt
The primary court had jurisdiction to determine the ownership dispute as part of the probate proceedings, following the High Court's directives and established legal precedent. All grounds of objection were addressed by the lower courts, and the issue of revocation of the administrator had already been determined and dismissed by the High Court. The right to be heard was not violated as the appellant herself requested written submissions, which are legally equivalent to oral hearings. There is no statutory time limit for filing probate applications in primary courts, and the appellant failed…
Source excerpt
The High Court revoked the respondent’s administratrix appointment after finding she concealed an existing administrator for the same estate.
Non-compliance with Rule 75 of the Probate and Administration Rules regarding citation is fatal to the proceedings. The trial court failed to ensure proper citation was made in the court house and published in the government gazette or newspaper, and there was no proof of such citation. Consequently, the proceedings and appointment of the respondent as administratrix are null and void.
Source excerpt
High Court appeal over probate distribution dismissed. The court upheld customary-law administration of a polygamous estate and found no fatal procedural irregularity.
High Court probate appeal partly allowed. The court reinstated the appellant as a beneficiary, rejected claims for two children’s estate shares, and quashed the District Court’s distribution orders.
The High Court held that neither side proved lawful ownership of the disputed Msaranga land, and declared the first defendant’s titles illegal and void.
The District Court erred by considering evidence and determining ownership of property not properly tendered or proven at trial, and by addressing matters not raised or determined by the Primary Court. The burden of proof was not met by the respondent regarding exclusion of property from the estate. The trial court's decision is restored as the District Court's findings were not supported by proper evaluation of evidence or jurisdiction.
Source excerpt
The district court erred in determining ownership of the disputed house and granting relief not specifically pleaded, as it lacked jurisdiction to do so in a probate appeal. Such disputes must be resolved by a competent land court or tribunal. The appointment of the administrator was proper.
Source excerpt
Explore more
