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 allowed a criminal appeal after finding a material mismatch between the charge and the evidence on the date of the alleged offence.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, finding the prosecution had not proved personation of a public servant beyond reasonable doubt.
The High Court dismissed an appeal over damages for adultery, holding that the appellant’s evidence was contradictory and insufficient on a balance of probabilities.
The respondent failed to prove ownership of the property and that the alleged properties were damaged by the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The trial and appellate courts misdirected themselves on the evidence, and the prosecution failed to establish the offence's elements.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after finding a material variance between the charge sheet and the evidence on the weapon used in the robbery.
Since the execution of the ward tribunal's order declaring the respondent as landowner was not completed and the appellant was not declared to have lost ownership of the trees, the criminal court lacked jurisdiction to convict for criminal trespass; the dispute over ownership was not finally resolved in a civil forum.
Source excerpt
The appeal lacked merit as the lower courts had jurisdiction, the offence was proved beyond reasonable doubt, and there was no miscarriage of justice or misapprehension of evidence warranting interference by the second appellate court.
Source excerpt
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt all elements of unnatural offence under section 154(1)(a) of the Penal Code, including the victim's age, penetration, and identity of the appellant. Non-compliance with section 127(2) of the Evidence Act did not render the child witness's evidence inadmissible due to statutory amendment. Extrajudicial and cautioned statements were expunged for procedural flaws, but remaining evidence was sufficient. The defence did not raise reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was found in possession of the stolen goods because the purported certificate of seizure was not valid, and the oral evidence of seizure was unsupported, rendering the conviction unsafe.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt as the visual identification evidence was not watertight and did not meet the required legal standards, making the conviction unsafe.
Source excerpt
Explore more
