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, holding that the trial court failed to comply with section 226(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act before proceeding in the appellant’s absence.
Court of Appeal held that a magistrate’s failure to decide promptly on recalling witnesses after takeover rendered the trial a nullity and declined a retrial.
A family cattle dispute was partly allowed on appeal, with the High Court finding the appellant proved ownership of cattle but not the bicycle claim.
The omission to record reasons for reassignment of magistrate was not fatal as no evidence had been recorded by the predecessor; contradictions in prosecution evidence were minor and did not affect the root of the case; the appellant was properly identified and arrested in hot pursuit with stolen property; chain of custody was sufficiently established through oral evidence and identification; and the prosecution proved the offence of armed robbery beyond reasonable doubt.
Source excerpt
The High Court quashed a rape conviction and 30-year sentence after finding the judgment was incompetent because the magistrate’s identity was inconsistent.
Appellant failed to strictly prove specific damages as required by law. Acceptance of Tshs. 30,000,000 as compensation estopped further claims. Employment was not proved by contract. No procedural error in change of magistrate or ex parte order prejudiced appellant. Court has no duty to guide layperson in civil cases.
Source excerpt
The proceedings were a nullity due to the failure to record reasons for the change of magistrate as required by section 214(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Given evidentiary gaps, a retrial would be unjust. The conviction and sentence are quashed and the appellant is to be released.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a probate appeal challenging alleged procedural irregularities, finding no denial of hearing and no actual change of magistrate.
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants trafficked narcotic drugs, and their own admissions corroborated the evidence. The chain of custody was intact, and procedural complaints were unfounded. However, the maximum sentence was not justified for first offenders; a five-year custodial sentence was appropriate.
Source excerpt
Failure of the successor magistrate to record reasons for taking over the trial from his predecessor, as required by section 214(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, renders the proceedings from that point a nullity and the judgment unlawful, regardless of the accused's absence during trial.
Source excerpt
Explore more
