Tanzania Case Law

JUDGEMENT YOHANA SANGA

Court

TANZLII

The appellant was convicted for a non-existent offence as the cited statutory provisions do not create the offence of unlawful entry into a national park. On the second count, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant disturbed the habitat of biological diversity, due to contradictory evidence regarding the location of the alleged offence.

Source excerpt

• Unlawful entry into national park
• Disturbing habitat of biological diversity
• Burden of proof
• Evaluation of evidence
• Interpretation of statutes

Read case analysis

Ally Omary

Court

TANZLII

The court found that only four grounds raised by the applicants constitute points of law worthy of certification to the Court of Appeal: interpretation of time limitation for objections, misconstruction of section 4 of the Birth and Death Registration Act, interpretation of factors for appointment of administrator, and whether second objection can be entertained without general citation. Defects in affidavit verification and party designation were minor and did not render the application incompetent.

Source excerpt

• Certificate on point of law
• Appointment of administrator
• Objection proceedings
• Interpretation of statutes

Read case analysis

PETER MNANKA tanzlii

Court

TANZLII

The taxing officer did not err in allowing costs after disallowing more than one-sixth of the bill of costs because, after disregarding the instruction fee taxed off as permitted by the proviso to Order 48 of the Advocates Remuneration Order, the amount disallowed was less than one-sixth. However, the instruction fee awarded was excessive as the taxing officer applied the highest rate without justification; the lowest rate should have been applied. Certain items were wrongly allowed and are taxed off.

Source excerpt

• Taxation of costs
• Advocates remuneration order
• Judicial discretion
• Interpretation of statutes

Read case analysis

republic vs omary bakary chinguile 2 others 2023 tzhc 22659 30 october 2023

Court

TZHC

The District Court erred in holding that the certificate conferring jurisdiction was issued under the wrong provision. The proper provision for mixed economic and non-economic offences is section 12(4) of EOCA, as interpreted by the Court of Appeal in Kurwa Limbu @ Musha v. R. The appeal is allowed and the District Court is ordered to proceed with the case from where it ended.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Economic crimes
• Interpretation of statutes
• Doctrine of precedent

Read case analysis

game discount world tanzania vs the commissioner general tanzania revenue authority 2023 tzca 17755 13 october 2023

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal held that undeclared warehousing and transport costs were properly added to customs value under the East African Community Customs Management Act.

• Customs valuation
• Import duties
• Burden of proof
• Interpretation of statutes
• Customs-valuation
• Import-duties

Read case analysis

xavier f kissinda others vs tanzania zambia railway authority tazara 2023 tzca 17474 7 august 2023

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal held that TAZARA employees were bound by a collective agreement fixing compulsory retirement at 55, and dismissed the appeal.

• Compulsory retirement
• Collective agreements
• Interpretation of statutes
• Employment contracts
• Compulsory-retirement
• Collective-agreements

Read case analysis

director of public prosecutions vs chacha nyamuhanga 2023 tzca 17426 20 july 2023

Court

TZCA

A mere typographical error in the citation of the Penal Code revision did not prejudice the respondent and was curable; the High Court erred by acquitting the respondent on this basis without considering the evidence.

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Defective charge sheet
• Curable irregularities
• Interpretation of statutes

Read case analysis

ms regimanuel gray t ltd vs mrs mwajabu mrisho kitundu others 2023 tzca 17287 31 may 2023

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal struck out a land appeal for want of leave, holding that section 47(1) of the Land Disputes Courts Act remains subject to the Appellate Jurisdiction Act.

• Leave to appeal
• Appealability of orders
• Interpretation of statutes
• Leave-to-appeal
• Appealability-of-orders
• Statutory-interpretation

Read case analysis

CIVIL REFERENCE NO

Court

TANZLII

The preliminary objection is overruled because the issue of whether service was effected within the prescribed time involves factual disputes that require evidence and is not a pure point of law.

Source excerpt

• Preliminary objection
• Service of process
• Interpretation of statutes
• Advocates remuneration

Read case analysis

LOUIS DREYFUS SUISSE SA VS KAHAMA OIL MILLS LTD MISC

Court

TANZLII

Applications for recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards under the Arbitration Act, 2020 are not governed by the 6-month limitation period in Item 18 of Part III of the Schedule to the Law of Limitation Act, which applies only to awards under the Civil Procedure Code. Instead, such applications fall under Item 21 of Part III of the Schedule, which prescribes a 60-day limitation period. As the present application was filed after the lapse of 60 days from the date of the award, it is time-barred and must be dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Limitation of actions
• Recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards
• Interpretation of statutes
• Precedent and stare decisis

Read case analysis