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 Court of Appeal dismissed a review application, finding no manifest error, no denial of a hearing, and no substantiated bias in the earlier appeal.
The Court held that the applicant's grounds for review—alleged manifest error, nullity, or illegality—were unsubstantiated and largely challenged the procedure and evidence in subordinate tribunals, which is outside the scope of review. No manifest error, illegality, or fraud was demonstrated on the face of the Court's judgment to justify review.
Source excerpt
The applicants' grounds were mere disagreements with the Court's previous reasoning and did not constitute errors on the face of the record; review jurisdiction does not permit substitution of legal views or detailed scrutiny of prior decisions.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania dismissed the Republic’s application for extension of time to seek review, finding no good cause and no accounting for 127 days’ delay.
The Court of Appeal reviewed its earlier ruling, finding a manifest error in referring to re-engagement under the wrong ELRA provision and substituting reinstatement.
The applicant failed to demonstrate a manifest error on the face of the record or deprivation of opportunity to be heard as required under Rule 66(1)(a) and (b). The alleged mistake of fact does not qualify as a ground for review and would require evidence and reasoning, making it a ground of appeal rather than review. The Court decided the appeal based on material presented, and the applicant had opportunity to inform the Court of the High Court's determination but did not do so.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to demonstrate any error apparent on the face of the record as required by Rule 66(1)(a); the alleged illegality in PW4's evidence was not self-evident and would require elaborate reasoning, thus not qualifying for review.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal dismissed a criminal review application, holding that the alleged irregularity in a police investigator’s evidence was not an apparent error on the record.
Application for review dismissed: the Court of Appeal held the grounds were ordinary appeal points, not a manifest error on the face of the record.
The Court of Appeal dismissed an application to review its earlier judgment, holding that the applicants failed to show a manifest error on the record under Rule 66(1).
Explore more
