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 executing tribunal failed to comply with mandatory procedural requirements by not issuing an order for the judgment debtor to comply with the decree before entertaining objections, thereby fatally violating the applicant's rights and the applicable regulations.
Source excerpt
The executing tribunal's order was consistent with the decree as it limited execution to the area where the water tank pole was erected, and both parties were afforded an opportunity to be heard regarding the extent and manner of execution. The application for revision lacked merit as the applicant's complaints were unfounded.
Source excerpt
The appeal was dismissed because the executing tribunal properly executed a valid and unchallenged decree from the ward tribunal, and had no jurisdiction to question its validity or the boundaries as alleged by the appellant. The grounds of appeal lacked merit as the tribunal acted within its mandate and the appellant failed to show sufficient cause for interference.
Source excerpt
The amendment to the Government Proceedings Act does not apply retrospectively to proceedings instituted before its commencement, and the trial tribunal was bound to comply with the Court of Appeal's retrial order; failure to do so was an error.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a land appeal, held the preliminary objection was not a pure point of law, and quashed proceedings for lack of jurisdiction.
The appeal was dismissed because the Ward Tribunal successfully mediated the dispute and recorded a consent judgment dividing the land equally, which was binding on the parties. The District Land and Housing Tribunal was correct in striking out the application as there was no certificate of mediation failure, and the appellant did not establish any grounds to set aside the consent order.
Source excerpt
The High Court quashed a district land tribunal ruling after finding no proof that the dispute had first undergone mandatory ward tribunal settlement.
The High Court held that its previous order in Miscellaneous Civil Revision No. 03 of 2023 did not conclusively determine the rights of the parties or issue any executable orders, but rather directed the matter to start afresh. Therefore, there was no decree-holder or judgment-debtor, and the DLHT was correct in dismissing the application for execution as there was no executable order.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal had jurisdiction as Kigamboni DLHT was not operational when the case was filed; the appellant's arguments on consent and evidence were not pleaded and lacked merit; the requirement to read the application was for respondents' benefit, who were represented, thus the ground was unmerited.
Source excerpt
The tribunal erred in law by failing to declare the appellant the rightful owner despite her certificate of title, exceeded its jurisdiction by ordering an exchange of plots not sought by the parties, and awarded inadequate general damages. The appeal is meritorious and the tribunal's decision is set aside.
Source excerpt
Explore more
