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
Application lacked merit as proposed points of law were either mixed with facts or not pure points of law; certification was refused and application dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
The High Court allowed a land appeal, quashed two lower tribunal judgments, and ordered a trial de novo after finding defects in tribunal composition and party capacity.
The High Court quashed a district court appeal and primary court proceedings after finding the setting-aside application for an ex parte judgment was time-barred.
The High Court of Tanzania dismissed a land appeal, holding that the tribunal had properly evaluated the evidence and upheld the finding on ownership.
The High Court granted the applicants an extension of time to file a revision application, finding they had shown sufficient cause after a prior revision was struck out on a technical defect.
The High Court allowed a second appeal, holding that a dispute over allegedly entrusted beds was not a customary-law claim and that the lower courts lacked jurisdiction.
Redemption of the mortgaged shamba by the respondent did not confer ownership as the mortgage deeds lacked the necessary conditions under Haya customary law; possession alone does not confer title; inheritance should be equitably distributed by the clan council among the appellants as the respondent already inherited other plots; limitation period had not expired as adverse possession began only in 1982.
Source excerpt
The High Court of Tanzania at Mbeya allowed a civil appeal over a customary-law cattle claim, holding the respondent had not proved the claim and had delayed unreasonably.
High Court appeal in a customary-law adultery and custody dispute. The court held the adultery and custody claims were time-barred, but set aside custody for the respondent.
The appellant's claim was not time-barred as it was filed within the 3-year limitation period for money lent under Customary Law. The attachment order was properly issued under the relevant rules.
Source excerpt
Explore more
