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 defence cannot effectively cross-examine or demonstrate contradictions without possession of the original previous statement of PW1; therefore, the Republic must supply the original statement to the defence to comply with procedural fairness and the requirements of section 154 of the Evidence Act as interpreted by precedent.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal erred in law by refusing to allow amendment of pleadings and production of documents, thereby denying parties their legal right and occasioning injustice. The proceedings and decisions of the Tribunal and High Court are nullified and the matter is remitted for rehearing with parties allowed to amend pleadings and produce documents as necessary.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that a CMA order compelling production of documents was interlocutory, not final. The application for revision was therefore dismissed under Rule 50.
The court found that a list of additional documents had been filed by the plaintiffs and was on record, which was not brought to the court's attention during the prior hearing. Invoking the overriding principle under section 3A of the CPC, the court granted leave to produce the documents, prioritizing substantive justice over procedural technicalities.
Source excerpt
The High Court partly upheld objections to late-filed additional documents, expunging the list of additional documents, but allowed notices to produce to stand.
The High Court sustained an evidentiary objection, holding that photocopies of company documents could not be tendered because the notice to produce lacked the required list of documents.
The High Court’s Commercial Division held that a faxed order was inadmissible secondary evidence because the statutory conditions for admitting it were not proved.
The Court exercised its discretion to admit the Commission nationale de lutte contre le genocide as amicus curiae, ordered the respondent to facilitate access between applicant and her counsel and respect attorney-client privilege, rejected the request for videoconference participation due to lack of procedural rules and technical capacity, and ordered the respondent to produce requested documents, finding the respondent's objections insufficient.
Source excerpt
The High Court upheld a preliminary objection and struck out an application for leave to produce documents, holding it was procedurally incompetent and beyond the court’s revisional jurisdiction.
The High Court held that its revisional jurisdiction under section 44(1)(b) could extend to interlocutory magistrates’ court proceedings, dismissing the preliminary objection.
Explore more
