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 conviction was quashed because the prosecution failed to properly identify the key exhibit (P.6), and the respondent conceded that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction.
Source excerpt
Conviction based on the doctrine of recent possession was illegal because the prosecution failed to prove that the items found with the appellants were positively the property of the complainant; mere brand identification and unproduced receipts were insufficient.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed a second appeal, holding that the complainant did not prove ownership of the phone allegedly recently possessed by the appellant.
The Court of Appeal of Tanzania allowed a cattle theft appeal, holding that the prosecution failed to prove the recovered cattle belonged to the complainant.
Second appeal on receiving stolen property failed because the prosecution did not adequately prove ownership of the recovered items for recent possession.
The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; the doctrine of recent possession was misapplied as the appellant gave a reasonable explanation and produced a receipt; identification of the alleged stolen phone was insufficient; the trial court failed to consider the defence case and objections, resulting in a miscarriage of justice.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, holding that burglary and stealing were not proved beyond reasonable doubt and that suspicion could not sustain conviction.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, quashed duplicate convictions and set aside 14-year sentences after finding double punishment, bad search procedure, and weak identification evidence.
Conviction quashed due to improper identification of stolen property and inadmissible evidence against second appellant.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, quashed the burglary and stealing convictions, and set aside the sentence because identification and search evidence were defective.
Explore more
