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
Applicants failed to establish a prima facie case as they did not provide evidence of ownership of the disputed land. Without proof of ownership, irreparable loss and balance of convenience cannot be established. All conditions for granting Mareva injunction must be met, and applicants failed to satisfy them.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to demonstrate irreparable loss as the alleged acts (demolition and construction) had already been completed; injunctive relief cannot be granted to prevent acts that have already occurred.
Source excerpt
The applicant established a prima facie case due to disputed indebtedness and alleged statutory non-compliance in the auction process. The applicant demonstrated likelihood of irreparable harm through loss of business and reputation, and the balance of convenience favored the applicant as the respondents had alternative legal remedies. Therefore, the conditions for a temporary injunction were met.
Source excerpt
Applicant failed to establish a strong prima facie case, ongoing or imminent threat to property, or irreparable loss not compensable by damages. Respondents' evidence was uncontroverted. Public interest in use of the road outweighs applicant's individual interest. All conditions for mareva injunction were not met.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused due to unreliable and insufficient identification evidence, as the only identifying witness was uncorroborated and the lighting conditions were inadequately explained.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to establish a prima facie case as he was not lawfully leased the land, the authority permitting his occupation was revoked, and he failed to meet conditions for alternative tenancy. His inability to pay for the alternative lease does not entitle him to continued occupation. No irreparable loss or balance of convenience in his favour was established. Application dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
The High Court partly allowed a criminal appeal, finding a prima facie case on the first count but not on the illegal practicing count.
Applicant established prima facie case, demonstrated likelihood of irreparable loss due to loss of home and associated psychological injury, and balance of convenience favors applicant as she would suffer more if evicted before expiry of notice.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that witness evidence was enough to establish a prima facie case for malicious damage to property and remitted the matter for trial.
The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case due to inconsistencies, lack of credible evidence, failure to call material witnesses, and the inability of circumstantial evidence to exclude other reasonable hypotheses. The accused is acquitted under section 293(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Source excerpt
Explore more
