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 High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that revision was incompetent because the appellant had an available and unblocked right of appeal against the Primary Court ruling.
The High Court set aside probate proceedings because the appellants were denied the chance to adduce evidence in a revocation application, making the closure a nullity.
The High Court dismissed a probate appeal as time-barred, holding that the appellants failed to prove timely electronic filing within the 30-day limit.
The High Court dismissed a probate appeal, holding the appellant had been heard in the primary court and should have appealed rather than sought revision.
The High Court held Masanze Primary Court lacked jurisdiction to appoint the plaintiff as administrator, because the deceased’s fixed abode was within Ruaha KII Primary Court’s area.
The application is incompetent because the notice of intended execution attached was not issued by the court and the Primary Court's order did not grant any right to the respondent that could be executed or stayed. Therefore, the requirements under rule 11 (7) (d) of the Rules were not met.
Source excerpt
Application allowed solely on ground of apparent illegality raised by applicant, which constitutes sufficient reason for extension of time to seek certification on point of law, despite failure to account for delay and lack of proof of sickness.
Source excerpt
The preliminary objection is without merit because the cited provision of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act does not apply to appeals from subordinate courts to the High Court. The objection was not properly grounded in law and is therefore struck out.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal struck out an application for extension of time to seek leave to appeal, holding that recent amendments removed the leave requirement.
Applicants failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for delay, were aware and heard in District Court revision, alleged illegality not apparent on face of record, and failed to account for each day of delay; thus, extension of time is not warranted.
Source excerpt
Explore more
