Tanzania Case Law

ronilick kasambara mchami vs brighton b l kilewa 3 others 2023 tzhc 23503 29 december 2023

Court

TZHC

The words and letters complained of were not inherently defamatory, and even if they could be construed as defamatory, they were published in the context of official communications to persons with a legitimate interest, protected by qualified privilege. No malice was established. The complainant failed to prove defamation or entitlement to damages.

Source excerpt

• Defamation
• Employment termination
• Qualified privilege
• Secondment
• Procedural law

Read case analysis

dr guiseppe di giulio vs international livestock research institute another 2022 tzhc 11990 17 august 2022

Court

TZHC

The High Court allowed a defamation appeal, holding that the appellant had justified most statements as true, fair comment, and privileged, so damages fell away.

• Defamation
• Justification
• Fair comment
• Qualified privilege
• Damages
• Fair-comment

Read case analysis

imani omari madega vs yusuf mehboob manji others 2022 tzca 488 2 august 2022

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal held that the appellant failed to prove the first respondent uttered the defamatory words, but found the other respondents liable for publication.

• Defamation
• Burden of proof
• Pleadings
• Damages
• Qualified privilege
• Justification

Read case analysis

hamza byarushengo vs fulgencia manya others 2022 tzca 207 14 april 2022

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal dismissed a libel appeal, holding that the appellant failed to plead and prove the exact defamatory words and did not discharge the burden of proof.

• Defamation
• Libel
• Burden of proof
• Civil procedure
• Qualified privilege
• Burden-of-proof

Read case analysis

CIVIL APPEAL NO 320 OF 2022 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KENYA COMMERCIAL BANK T LIMITED ALBERT ODONGO VS

Court

TANZLII

The respondent failed to prove, on balance of probabilities, that the employer's letter was defamatory or published to a third party. Unauthorized access by PW2 did not amount to publication. Qualified privilege applied to internal disciplinary communications. Damages awarded below were set aside.

Source excerpt

• Defamation
• Employer liability
• Qualified privilege
• Vicarious liability

Read case analysis

nzaro nuhu kachenje vs commercial bank of africa 2021 tzhc 9243 12 october 2021

Court

TZHC

The High Court held that notices announcing a bank employee’s resignation were not defamatory, and that qualified privilege applied. The suit was dismissed with costs.

• Defamation by innuendo
• Qualified privilege
• Malice
• Agency termination
• Damages
• Defamation-by-innuendo

Read case analysis

20170824 TZHC Mwanza

Court

TZHC

The High Court dismissed a defamation claim over an ITV news bulletin, finding the plaintiff did not prove the broadcast was as alleged or that malice was shown.

• Defamation
• Qualified privilege
• Freedom of expression
• Damages
• Qualified-privilege
• Freedom-of-expression

Read case analysis

lazaro njalabi vs h m gulamali 2017 tzhc 2155 21 august 2017

Court

TZHC

The High Court dismissed a defamation appeal, holding that a confidential complaint to TRA’s Commissioner was not published to third parties and was protected by qualified privilege.

• Defamation
• Qualified privilege
• Malice
• Evidence admissibility
• Qualified-privilege
• Publication

Read case analysis

cosmas mwaifwani vs editor of dira ya mtanzania another 2014 tzhc 2364 29 december 2014

Court

TZHC

The High Court granted a temporary injunction restraining further allegedly defamatory publications against the applicant pending determination of the main suit.

• Temporary injunction
• Defamation
• Freedom of expression
• Qualified privilege
• Fair comment
• Temporary-injunction

Read case analysis

tanzania electric supply co ltd vs jumanne masanja 2014 tzhc 1 8 september 2014

Court

TZHC

The suit was time-barred as the cause of action accrued on the date of acquittal, not the date of receiving the judgment; special damages were not strictly proved; and the appellant's report to the police was qualifiedly privileged, precluding liability for malicious prosecution.

Source excerpt

• Malicious prosecution
• Limitation of actions
• Special damages
• Joinder of parties
• Qualified privilege

Read case analysis