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 held that the plaintiffs proved historical ownership of 18 acres at Somanda, and declared the purported occupancy grant to the police unlawful.
The resurvey process was a nullity as the appellant, an interested party, was not involved, and the trial Tribunal erred in relying on its results. The application was not time barred as the cause of action was for recovery of land, not tort.
Source excerpt
The trial tribunal erred by determining the case on issues not pleaded, specifically invoking adverse possession without it being raised by the parties. The dispute was about a portion of land with an incomplete survey process, and the land authority was not a party. The proper procedure is to allow the survey process to be completed by the relevant authority, after which any aggrieved party may challenge the outcome.
Source excerpt
There was no legal justification to survey the land and issue a title deed to the appellant while a dispute existed and without full engagement of both parties. The concurrent findings of the lower tribunals that the respondent was the rightful owner and that the appellant's title deed was invalid are upheld. The appeal is dismissed as baseless.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a land appeal, upholding findings that a title deed issued during an unresolved boundary dispute was invalid.
The High Court’s Land Division granted leave to appeal after finding the proposed grounds raised an arguable appeal and prima facie issues for the Court of Appeal.
Failure to involve the plaintiff and other affected persons in the boundary recovery exercise constituted a fatal breach of natural justice and statutory requirements, rendering the survey and subsequent demolition notices invalid.
Source excerpt
The second defendant acquired title to the land first from the original owner, and the subsequent sale to the plaintiffs' predecessor was invalid as the seller had no title to pass. The plaintiffs' survey and certificate of title are nullities due to procedural defects and lack of neighbour involvement. The first defendant lawfully occupies the land, and the suit is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a land appeal, holding that the respondents’ Letters of Offer remained valid because revocation was not completed and ownership was not displaced.
The Court of Appeal held that the respondent lawfully acquired the land by compensating occupiers, dismissed the appeal, and set aside the damages award.
Explore more
