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 judge recused himself from a mosque-related civil application, finding his familiarity with some parties could create a reasonable suspicion of bias.
The reasons advanced for recusal are flimsy and do not fall within the prescribed principles; no evidence of bias or conflict exists, and the current case is new. However, in the interest of justice, the judge recused himself.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed an application for recusal in a probate cause, holding that the grounds raised did not show bias and that repeated applications amounted to forum shopping.
The High Court dismissed a recusal application, holding the allegations of bias were unsupported and did not justify disqualification of the presiding judge.
The High Court Labour Division refused a recusal request, holding that raising competence and jurisdiction issues does not show bias or justify disqualification.
The defendant's counsel failed to provide sufficient factual or legal grounds for recusal under Rule 9 of GN. 1001 of 2020. Alleged conflict of interest and bias were not substantiated, and scheduling conflicts were resolved. The judge found no justification for recusal and will proceed to hear the case.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal struck out an appeal against a refusal to recuse, holding the ruling was interlocutory and leave to appeal was required but not sought.
The High Court considered a recusal request in an application for leave to appeal. Although the judge found the allegations baseless, he withdrew in the interests of justice.
The High Court’s Commercial Division recused itself after plaintiffs alleged bias arising from procedural rulings, refusals of adjournment, and concerns over impleadment.
The appellant failed to prove his case to the required standard, and all grounds of appeal lacked merit. The trial tribunal followed proper procedure and correctly found for the respondent.
Source excerpt
Explore more
