Tanzania Case Law

STANLEY SIMON SENDEU VS MARTHA WILSON ZAKAYO

Court

TANZLII

The evidence established that all matrimonial assets, including the block-built house, were acquired jointly during the marriage. The appellant failed to challenge the respondent's evidence on joint acquisition. The concurrent findings of the lower courts on the division of assets (60% to appellant, 40% to respondent) were based on proper assessment of contribution and are not to be disturbed absent misdirection or error.

Source excerpt

• Division of matrimonial assets
• Contribution to matrimonial property
• Appeals process

Read case analysis

JOVITHA

Court

TANZLII

Properties distributed by family members under customary law and developed by the spouses are matrimonial assets subject to division. Equal division of assets and maintenance for children was proper; maintenance for the appellant was not warranted as she received an equal share of assets.

Source excerpt

• Division of matrimonial assets
• Maintenance
• Custody of children
• Customary inheritance
• Probate

Read case analysis

77

Court

TANZLII

The existence of prescribed Form No. 3 in the Trial Court’s case file, filled and stamped by the ward tribunal acting as a reconciliation board, confirms compliance with the mandatory referral requirement. Therefore, the appeal lacks merit as the procedural requirement was satisfied.

Source excerpt

• Divorce
• Presumption of marriage
• Reconciliation board
• Division of matrimonial assets

Read case analysis

GREYSON MPANDA Vs

Court

TANZLII

The proceedings before the trial court and appellate court were a nullity due to the invalid certificate from the Marriage Reconciliation Board, as the secretary improperly participated and signed, rendering the petition incomplete and incompetent.

Source excerpt

• Divorce
• Custody of child
• Division of matrimonial assets
• Jurisdiction
• Marriage reconciliation board

Read case analysis

JOVIN MUTA V BEATRICE SAANANE

Court

TANZLII

The best interests of the child require consideration of stability, sibling relationships, and environment; the presumption in favor of the mother for children under seven is rebuttable where continuity and welfare favor the father. The car RAV 4 was properly recognized as the respondent's property based on admission and prior agreement, and no further description was necessary.

Source excerpt

• Custody of children
• Division of matrimonial assets
• Dissolution of marriage

Read case analysis

tanzlii 18ocrNDUMBARO0001

Court

TANZLII

Respondent contributed to acquisition of matrimonial assets through business and domestic duties; 40% division justified. Sugar cane farm not proved as matrimonial property due to contradictory evidence. Nyamvisi plot not proved as matrimonial property; appellant failed to establish intent. Order for payment of school fees unjustified as not pleaded.

Source excerpt

• Division of matrimonial assets
• Contribution to matrimonial property
• Dissolution of marriage
• Maintenance

Read case analysis

38

Court

TANZLII

There was insufficient evidence from either party to establish the extent of contribution to the matrimonial assets; therefore, equal division was fair and the District Court's decision was upheld.

Source excerpt

• Divorce
• Custody
• Maintenance
• Division of matrimonial assets
• Polygamy

Read case analysis

deogratius omary v trifaina francis 2024 tzhc 565 29 february 2024

Court

TZHC

High Court matrimonial appeal partly allowed: the judge redivided matrimonial assets, recognizing contribution, domestic work, and the children’s needs.

• Division of matrimonial assets
• Custody of children
• Contribution to matrimonial property
• Appeals procedure
• Division-of-matrimonial-assets
• Contribution-to-matrimonial-property

Read case analysis

shakila lucas vs ramadhani sadiki 2024 tzca 36 14 february 2024

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal upheld the division of matrimonial assets and dismissed the appeal, holding it could not re-evaluate the evidence afresh without legal error.

• Division of matrimonial assets
• Matrimonial property
• Concurrent findings
• Appellate jurisdiction
• Burden of proof
• Family-law

Read case analysis

Judgement Matrimonal Appeal No

Court

TANZLII

The trial court erred by raising and deciding the issue of time bar without giving the parties the right to be heard, violating the principle of audi alteram partem and rendering its judgment a nullity. Furthermore, the Law of Limitation Act does not apply to matrimonial proceedings for divorce and division of assets, as the Law of Marriage Act does not prescribe a maximum limitation period for such actions.

Source excerpt

• Divorce
• Division of matrimonial assets
• Limitation of actions
• Right to be heard
• Jurisdiction

Read case analysis