Tanzania Case Law

REFERENCE NO 5869 OF 2024

Court

TANZLII

The Court found that there exist conflicting High Court decisions regarding whether a CMA condonation decision is interlocutory or final and whether such a decision is subject to revision under section 91 of ELRA. The Court certified that these are points of law warranting determination by the Court of Appeal and ordered referral accordingly.

Source excerpt

• Interlocutory vs final orders
• Condonation in labour disputes
• Revision jurisdiction
• Conflicting judgments
• Access to justice

Read case analysis

ZACHARIA FAUSTINE MASALU VS NGOSSO TRADERS CO

Court

TANZLII

Conflicting costs orders between Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2022 and Civil Case No. 38 of 2021 constitute good cause for extension of time to file notice of appeal; economic hardship was not proven.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Notice of appeal
• Costs orders
• Conflicting judgments

Read case analysis

CIVIL RERENCE NO

Court

TANZLII

The executing tribunal must determine whether the decree of the District Land and Housing Tribunal is executable; if it is vague or unexecutable, the tribunal should rule accordingly; the case file is returned for this determination.

Source excerpt

• Execution of decree
• Conflicting judgments
• Jurisdiction of executing tribunal

Read case analysis

godfrey peter salala vs national microfinance bank plc 2021 tzhc 9525 6 december 2021

Court

TZHC

The applicant demonstrated sufficient reason for leave as there are conflicting High Court decisions on whether a claim for refund of purchase price of land is a land dispute, which is a point of law warranting the Court of Appeal's intervention. Procedural irregularity in filing the application before the notice of appeal is cured by the overriding objective principle since both were filed within time.

Source excerpt

• Leave to appeal
• Jurisdiction
• Conflicting judgments
• Land law
• Procedural compliance

Read case analysis

Jenifer Albinius Nyamete

Court

TANZLII

The District Land and Housing Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain a land dispute over property already adjudicated as matrimonial property by the Resident Magistrate Court; the proper procedure for the first respondent was to file objection proceedings in the executing court, not a fresh land suit.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Matrimonial property
• Objection proceedings
• Conflicting judgments

Read case analysis

sanare lemomo vs shuku swalehe 2020 tzhc 4716 19 october 2020

Court

TZHC

The existence of apparent illegality in the tribunal's decision, evidenced by two conflicting judgments, constitutes sufficient reason to grant extension of time for the applicant to file for revision.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Revision
• Illegality as ground for extension
• Conflicting judgments

Read case analysis

maulid juma vs ismail mrindoko 2017 tzca 340 7 august 2017

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal held that Mto wa Mbu Ward Tribunal lacked jurisdiction over land in Makuyuni Ward, quashed its proceedings and later appeals, and left the Makuyuni decision in force.

• Ward tribunal jurisdiction
• Conflicting judgments
• Revisionary powers
• Land dispute resolution
• Ward-tribunal-jurisdiction
• Land-dispute-resolution

Read case analysis

20170803 TZCA Arusha

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal set aside proceedings from Mto wa Mbu Ward Tribunal for lack of territorial jurisdiction and left the Makuyuni Tribunal decision standing.

• Ward tribunal jurisdiction
• Conflicting judgments
• Revisionary powers
• Appeal timelines
• Ward-tribunal-jurisdiction
• Land-dispute-jurisdiction

Read case analysis

maulid juma vs ismail mrindoko 2017 tzca 188 3 august 2017

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal quashed Mto wa Mbu Ward Tribunal proceedings for lack of territorial jurisdiction and upheld the Makuyuni Ward Tribunal decision.

• Jurisdiction of ward tribunals
• Revision powers
• Conflicting judgments
• Appeals process
• Ward-tribunal-jurisdiction
• Land-disputes

Read case analysis

20141024 TZHC Iringa

Court

TZHC

The High Court of Tanzania at Iringa allowed review, vacating a 10 June 2008 order that dismissed an appeal, finding it was an error apparent on the record.

• Review
• Error apparent on the face of record
• Conflicting judgments
• Appeal process
• Civil-procedure
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis