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
Omission to disclose size of unsurveyed suit land in the plaint is fatal and renders the plaint incompetent for lack of sufficient description, thus absence of cause of action.
Source excerpt
Applicant demonstrated sufficient cause for three-day delay, acted promptly, and complied with procedural requirements. Application for extension of time is granted.
Source excerpt
The application was struck out because the applicant failed to attach the impugned decision, which is a mandatory precondition for leave to apply for judicial review. Without the decision, the court could not determine if there was a prima facie case or sufficient interest.
Source excerpt
The High Court struck out a criminal appeal as incompetent because the notice of appeal was filed in Mwanza, while the petition was filed in Geita.
The application is incompetent for failure to attach the intended Petition of Appeal or set out grounds of objection in the supporting affidavit as required by law; therefore, it must be struck out.
Source excerpt
The application is incompetent because the notice of application was signed by the advocate and not by the party bringing the application, in violation of Rule 24(2) of the Labour Court Rules, GN. No. 106 of 2007.
Source excerpt
The Civil Procedure Code does not apply to appeals originating from matrimonial proceedings except where the Law of Marriage Act or its rules are silent. The Law of Marriage Act and Rule 37 of the Matrimonial Proceedings Rules do not require the appellant to attach a copy of the decree to the memorandum of appeal; instead, the subordinate court must transmit the complete record. Therefore, the preliminary objection lacks merit.
Source excerpt
The application failed because the applicants did not prove the existence and consent of the persons they sought to represent, as required by Order 1 Rule 8(1) of the Civil Procedure Code. The court found inconsistencies and doubts in the list of persons and signatures, and absence of some applicants' names, thus not meeting the mandatory procedural requirements.
Source excerpt
The applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient cause for the delay, did not account for each day of delay, and did not corroborate his explanation with an affidavit from the prison officer. Contradictions in his statements further undermined his case. The application was therefore dismissed for lack of merit.
Source excerpt
The High Court Labour Division granted Bidco Oil and Soap Ltd 14 days to file a notice of intention to seek revision (CMA F10), finding technical delay and prompt action.
Explore more
