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 quashed the District Court’s revision ruling because the appellant should have appealed under the Magistrates’ Courts Act, not sought revision.
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.
Failure to join Irene Onesmo Nangole, a necessary party to execution proceedings, rendered the revision proceedings incompetent; appeal struck out for incompetency.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a matrimonial appeal, holding that revision was unavailable where the appellant had a right to appeal against a maintenance variation order.
The High Court struck out a land revision application as incompetent, holding that an appeal was the proper remedy and no exceptional reason for revision was shown.
The High Court dismissed an appeal in a probate administration dispute, holding that the appellant should have appealed rather than sought revision and was not denied a hearing.
Heirs who were not parties to the original probate proceedings have no right of appeal; their only remedy is to seek revision. The appellant, acting under their power of attorney, was entitled to file for revision, and the district court erred in striking out the application on the basis that an appeal should have been filed.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that striking out a case for want of jurisdiction without hearing the parties breached natural justice and warranted revision.
The application for revision is incompetent because the decision of the District Land and Housing Tribunal was appealable under section 41 of the Land Disputes Courts Act, and revision cannot be used as an alternative to appeal. The decision was not an interlocutory order, thus the applicant should have appealed, not sought revision.
Source excerpt
Applicant improperly invoked revisionary jurisdiction; grounds raised are appealable and do not demonstrate material irregularity or illegality. Revision cannot be used as substitute for appeal when right to appeal exists.
Source excerpt
Explore more
