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 appellant was only a guarantor, not the borrower; the DLHT misdirected itself by considering only respondents' evidence and failing to properly evaluate the evidence; the sale of the Disputed Property was inappropriate as the first respondent was the borrower and her property should have been sold first.
Source excerpt
The High Court entered summary judgment for Sikonge District Council and the Attorney General after the defendants failed to seek leave to defend a revenue recovery claim.
The court held that the initial spouse consent constituted a continuing security, binding the respondent to subsequent loans secured by the same property. The property qualifies as matrimonial property, and the respondent's consent was valid and continuous. The DLHT erred in requiring fresh consent for subsequent loans. The appellant is entitled to exercise power of sale due to loan default.
Source excerpt
The High Court found the mortgage over Plot No. 2146 lawful but held the auction was unlawful for lack of valid 14-day notice. The main suit was dismissed except for nullifying the auction.
The High Court partly allowed a bank’s claim on an overdraft facility, awarding Tshs. 200 million principal and Tshs. 10 million general damages, but rejecting higher and cheque-based claims.
The appeal was dismissed because the trial court had proper pecuniary jurisdiction, the documents in question were properly admitted and supported by evidence, there were no material contradictions affecting the outcome, and the amount claimed was substantiated by the ledger and testimony. All grounds of appeal failed.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that the defendants breached fuel supply, equipment, and transport agreements, and upheld guarantees against the 2nd and 3rd defendants.
The Court of Appeal held the bank proved an overdraft debt and that lack of a default notice did not defeat recovery after expiry of the facility.
The court held that Rex Investment Limited breached a collective guarantee for salary loans and was liable to pay the outstanding balance, interest, and costs.
The High Court held Rex Investment Limited liable under a collective guarantee for employee salary loans and ordered payment of TZS 392,182,509 plus interest.
Explore more
