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 breakdown in communication and management among directors, abandonment of company affairs, and failure to comply with statutory obligations make it just and equitable to wind up Azure Boutique Resort Limited under section 279(1)(e) of the Companies Act.
Source excerpt
The High Court of Tanzania overruled a preliminary objection, holding that alleged non-compliance with land statutes could not be decided without evidence.
Failure to categorize the offence in the charge sheet under section 154(1) of the Penal Code prejudiced the appellant's defence and rendered the charge defective, invalidating the conviction and sentence.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that committal proceedings in an economic crimes case were a nullity for non-compliance with mandatory statutory and procedural rules.
The High Court held that non-compliance with section 24 of the Land Disputes Courts Act made the tribunal decision invalid and ordered the appeal reheard by a different chairman and assessors.
High Court held that the purchaser was liable to reimburse VAT paid by the supplier to TRA, and also ordered payment of an outstanding invoice amount.
The appellant did not comply with section 48(1)(e) of the Mining Act, 1979, as he failed to obtain written consent from the Capital Development Authority, the surface rights holder, before carrying out prospecting operations. The Commissioner was therefore justified in refusing to register the claim.
Source excerpt
The appellant did not comply with the legal requirement of obtaining written consent from the Capital Development Authority, the surface rights holder, before exercising rights under his prospecting licence. Therefore, the Commissioner was justified in refusing to register the claim.
Source excerpt
The lower courts' proceedings were vitiated by procedural irregularities and non-compliance with mandatory statutory requirements, rendering their judgments and orders a nullity.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that a court-martial appeal heard by a single High Court judge was a nullity because the statute required three judges.
Explore more
