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
Appellant proved ownership of the motorcycle by registration card as required by law. Respondents wrongfully converted the motorcycle, entitling appellant to compensation for value, loss of income, general damages, and interest.
Source excerpt
There was no error in the concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts that the appellant owed the respondent a printer worth TZS 950,000/= or its cash equivalent. The appellant was properly informed of the claim, and there is no basis to interfere with the lower courts’ decisions.
Source excerpt
The High Court partly allowed an appeal over seizure of fishing gear, finding the respondent failed to justify retaining the appellant’s property.
The High Court found unauthorized use of the plaintiff’s truck amounted to conversion and awarded special damages for loss of use. The counterclaim failed.
High Court civil appeal over confiscation of goods, ownership of shop stock, and damages. Appeal partly succeeded: special damages were reduced and general damages cut.
The Defendant bank was negligent in allowing unauthorized withdrawals from the Plaintiff's accounts by failing to verify signatures and confirm instructions with the authorized signatory. The Plaintiff did not authorize the disputed withdrawals, and credible forensic evidence established that the signatures used were not those of the Plaintiff's authorized signatory. The Defendant's conduct amounted to negligence, fraud, and conversion, breaching the banker-customer contractual relationship. No contributory negligence was established on the part of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff is entitled to…
Source excerpt
The appellant bank was solely liable for conversion of funds due to lack of good faith and negligence, and could not avail statutory protection; respondents were properly exonerated; omission to endorse exhibits did not occasion injustice and was not fatal.
Source excerpt
The 2nd respondent is solely liable for the loss occasioned to the 1st respondent due to wrongful conversion and negligence in handling the cheque; costs must be awarded to the successful party.
Source excerpt
The appellant did not act negligently in debiting the 1st respondent's account, having acted on a genuine cheque cleared through proper procedures. The 2nd respondent is solely liable for the loss occasioned by fraudulent cheque substitution and conversion, having credited the proceeds to a third party without proper clearance. The 1st respondent, as the true owner of the cheque, had a right of action. Costs must be awarded to the successful party.
Source excerpt
The High Court held the defendants liable after cheques drawn for named payees were paid to Bugwema Investment without authority. The plaintiff recovered USD 55,000 plus damages and costs.
Explore more
