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 plaintiff is entitled to withdraw the suit at any stage before decision, and both parties agreed to withdraw their respective claims; each party should bear their own costs.
Source excerpt
The High Court dismissed a land appeal on preliminary objection, holding it was filed out of time and in the wrong registry, making it incompetent.
Plaintiff's advocate Daniel Weiwei is disqualified due to conflict of interest arising from attesting a document central to the suit, as there is a real possibility he may be called as a witness, and the law prohibits an advocate from acting in such circumstances to avoid embarrassment and protect the integrity of proceedings.
Source excerpt
The plaint was struck out because it was drawn, endorsed, and filed by advocates (Orbit Attorneys) who had a conflict of interest, having previously represented the 1st defendant in a substantially related matter involving the same property and mortgage. The court found that the matters were connected and that the advocates had confidential information relevant to both cases, thus disqualifying them from acting against their former client.
Source excerpt
Both Lawgical Attorneys and Ngalo & Co. Advocates developed conflicts of interest due to prior representation of the Ladwa family; pleadings drawn and filed by these firms are improperly before the court and must be struck out.
Source excerpt
Disciplinary ruling finding advocate Fatuma Amani Karume guilty of gross professional misconduct for disparaging remarks against the Attorney General and judiciary.
The High Court held that a former company legal officer was not barred from appearing for the defendant absent proof of actual involvement or confidential knowledge.
Where an advocate has previously acted for a party in relation to a matter, he should not subsequently act for the opposing party in litigation on the same subject matter, as this undermines the principle of confidentiality and public confidence in the legal profession, regardless of whether actual prejudice or disclosure of confidential information is proven.
Source excerpt
Explore more
