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 appellant failed to prove his claim for TZS 1,150,000 as the alleged written contract was not properly tendered or admitted in evidence; only the amount admitted by the respondent (TZS 500,000) is proved. The District Court erred by considering the issue of interest, which was not raised at trial.
Source excerpt
The plaintiff failed to prove breach of contract or procedural impropriety in the disposal of the secured assets. The loan agreement and its variations were valid, the plaintiff defaulted, and the defendant followed the contractual and legal procedures for recovery. No counterclaim was properly pleaded or adjudicated. The suit is dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
High Court appeal over a loan default dispute: the borrower breached the agreement, and there was no credible proof the bank attached or sold the motor vehicles.
The High Court held the plaintiff’s property was mortgaged to secure a loan to the second defendant, but the auction process was unlawful for failure to serve mandatory notices.
The dispute resolution clause in the Deed of Assignment is binding and applies to the present dispute as the agreements are interconnected. The Plaintiff failed to comply with the requirement to attempt amicable settlement before filing suit. The court's jurisdiction is not ousted, but the suit must be stayed to allow parties to exhaust agreed ADR mechanisms.
Source excerpt
Trial court erred by awarding refund, compensation, and punitive damages not pleaded or proved; respondent defaulted on loan, appellant entitled to recover outstanding balance and penal interest; counterclaim dismissal was improper; insufficient evidence to support repair or replacement orders for vehicle.
Source excerpt
The Respondent failed to prove the loan amount of TZS 30,800,000/=; only TZS 9,190,000/= was proved as advanced and not repaid. The award of general damages was unjustified as no basis was provided. The lack of stamp duty on the loan agreement was an irregularity not affecting the validity of proceedings. Collateral documents not pleaded in the original plaint were expunged. Each party to bear its own costs.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal over a claimed TZS 200 million loan, finding the respondent had not proved the documents or loan on the balance of probabilities.
Both parties breached contract terms; plaintiff must repay loan but at agreed 21% interest, not 22%. Defendant breached by deducting repayments before grace period expired and charging excess interest. Defendant lawfully issued default notice and may sell mortgaged property if plaintiff defaults.
Source excerpt
High Court allowed a second appeal in a loan dispute, holding the claimant failed to prove a TZS 3,000,000 debt and that the key exhibit was inconsistent.
Explore more
