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
Since the Tribunal's order was to strike out the application and not to dismiss it, the appeal was incompetent as no appeal lies against an order striking out an application; the appellant's remedy was to file a fresh application.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against the striking out of a judicial review application, holding the second preliminary objection should not have been entertained.
Once a preliminary objection on the competence of an affidavit has been dismissed, it is improper to entertain a second preliminary objection on the same point; verification of subparagraphs in an affidavit is not a strict legal requirement and depends on the circumstances.
Source excerpt
The Court held that, although the general rule is that revision cannot be used as an alternative to appeal where an appeal lies, the present case presents arguably exceptional circumstances due to confusion in the execution process between the Deputy Registrar and the Judge. Therefore, the preliminary objection is dismissed and the matter should proceed to hearing.
Source excerpt
The striking out of the suit by the High Court amounted to a rejection of the plaint, which is a decree under the Civil Procedure Code and thus appealable. Since the applicant had a right of appeal and no special circumstances were shown to justify revision, the application for revision was misconceived and not maintainable.
Source excerpt
The impugned order is not among the appealable orders listed in section 74(1) and Order XL, Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code; therefore, the appeal is incompetent and must be struck out.
Source excerpt
The appeal was incompetent as it was filed against an unappealable order striking out the application; striking out does not finally determine the matter and does not confer a right of appeal.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a land appeal as time barred after finding it challenged an earlier tribunal decision outside the 45-day limit. Costs were awarded to the respondent.
The Court of Appeal held that refiling a commercial suit after an earlier suit was struck out for want of prosecution was an abuse of process and dismissed the appeal.
The Court of Appeal struck out a land appeal for want of leave, holding that section 47(1) of the Land Disputes Courts Act remains subject to the Appellate Jurisdiction Act.
Explore more
