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 Court of Appeal partly allowed the appeal, quashing the drunk-driving conviction but upholding the reckless-driving conviction.
The prosecution failed to prove the offence of driving under the influence of alcohol beyond reasonable doubt due to the timing of the test and intervening factors, but proved the offence of causing damage through reckless driving based on cumulative evidence including the sketch map, vehicle inspection report, and appellant's own testimony.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to prove the offence of driving under the influence of alcohol beyond reasonable doubt because the alcohol test was conducted 12 hours after the accident and after the appellant had consumed alcohol, making the result unreliable. However, the evidence, including the sketch map, vehicle inspection report, and the appellant's own testimony, cumulatively proved the offence of causing damage through reckless driving.
Source excerpt
The High Court partly allowed a criminal appeal, quashing careless driving but sustaining failure to stop at a railway crossing and reducing sentence.
The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction on the first count, and set aside the sentence, licence disqualification, and fine refund order.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after finding no evidence of negligent or reckless driving. A sudden spring failure caused the accident and the conviction was quashed.
The High Court quashed a reckless-driving conviction, holding that involvement in a road accident alone is not proof of reckless or dangerous driving.
The High Court dismissed a criminal appeal against convictions for reckless driving and using an unsafe motor vehicle, holding the driver was responsible for known defective brakes.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, quashed a conviction for inconsiderate use of a motor vehicle, and set aside a fine after finding the prosecution had not proved the case.
The conviction was unsafe because the trial magistrate misdirected himself by relying on opinion evidence regarding speed and failed to consider the potential bias of prosecution witnesses who had a motive to implicate the appellant.
Source excerpt
Explore more
