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
Retrospective application of the procedural amendment requiring mediation certificate from the Ward Tribunal is not warranted in cases already pending and at an advanced stage, as it would prejudice substantive rights and cause undue delay contrary to overriding objectives and constitutional principles.
Source excerpt
The dispute is a land dispute as it concerns the exercise of power of sale over mortgaged property; only land courts have jurisdiction, so the District Court's proceedings and judgment are quashed.
Source excerpt
Justice requires respondents to wait for outcome of counter claim before exercising right to sell suit property; applicant may suffer irreparable loss if property is disposed before determination; balance of convenience favors maintaining status quo pending determination of related cases.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal lacked pecuniary jurisdiction as the subject matter was not recovery of possession of immovable property but other proceedings, with a value exceeding the Tribunal's limit. The pleadings did not support the appellant's claim of lack of knowledge or consent to the mortgage, and the limitation clause in the mortgage deed conferred exclusive jurisdiction to the High Court Commercial Division. The appeal was therefore dismissed.
Source excerpt
The District Land and Housing Tribunal had jurisdiction because the pleaded facts and reliefs sought by the appellant related to land, specifically the sale and mortgage of the matrimonial property, which falls within the statutory definition of land disputes under the Land Act and Land Disputes Courts Act. The argument that the matter was purely commercial was rejected, and the appeal was dismissed as lacking merit.
Source excerpt
The High Court Land Division dismissed an application for temporary injunction over mortgaged property, finding the applicant failed to satisfy the injunction test.
The High Court held that a land suit was incompetent because an earlier suit over the same subject matter had been withdrawn without leave to refile.
The appeal and the underlying High Court proceedings were incompetent due to non-joinder of the mortgagor, a necessary party, and the appeal was also time-barred for failure to comply with procedural requirements. The proceedings, judgment, and decree were quashed as a nullity.
Source excerpt
The District Land and Housing Tribunal had jurisdiction over the dispute as it involved the exercise of mortgagee remedies over land, and the value was within the tribunal's pecuniary jurisdiction. The tribunal erred in holding otherwise and in dismissing the application at the preliminary objection stage.
Source excerpt
Land appeal allowed after the High Court found the tribunal misdirected itself on whether the appellant was a party to the loan agreement.
Explore more
