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
High Court land revision application dismissed as time-barred after the court held it was filed outside the 60-day limit without leave.
The High Court allowed a second appeal, holding that the respondents sued the wrong party and should have challenged the Regional Commissioner’s order by judicial review.
The proceedings and decisions of both the Ward Tribunal and District Land and Housing Tribunal were nullities due to failure to involve assessors' opinions and violation of the appellants' right to be heard, which are fundamental procedural errors that vitiate the entire proceedings.
Source excerpt
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to intervene in criminal proceedings pending committal in the subordinate court in the absence of a committal order, and the application is incompetent as it contravenes section 372(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Source excerpt
The District Court erred in dismissing the application for incompetence due to wrong citation of law; the correct order was to strike out the application, allowing the appellants to re-file after correcting the defect. Nullification of the entire proceedings was not warranted as the parties were heard on the preliminary objection and the finding of incompetence was proper.
Source excerpt
The application was dismissed because the issues raised by the applicants were either matters of fact already considered and determined by the High Court or new issues not raised at the appropriate stage, and thus did not constitute points of law warranting certification for appeal.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a criminal revision application, holding that revision could not replace an appeal where judgment had not yet been supplied.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after finding the guilty pleas were equivocal, the facts were inadequate, and the trial court followed an irregular plea procedure.
Explore more
