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 High Court upheld a retrenchment arising from loss of a service contract, finding the employer followed the Labour Act procedures and rejecting the ninth respondent’s challenge.
The Court held that the respondent is estopped from denying the payments made and the adjustment of the consent decree, as the parties' conduct and correspondence evidenced compromise and partial satisfaction. The applicants are obliged to pay the remaining balance to fully satisfy the decree.
Source excerpt
The High Court upheld a CMA award, finding retrenchment fair, rejecting overtime claims as unproved, and holding the applicants were bound by their pleadings.
Appellant failed to strictly prove specific damages as required by law. Acceptance of Tshs. 30,000,000 as compensation estopped further claims. Employment was not proved by contract. No procedural error in change of magistrate or ex parte order prejudiced appellant. Court has no duty to guide layperson in civil cases.
Source excerpt
The appellant, having supplied the seeds and allowed the second respondent to act as a dealer, is estopped from denying his authority. The evidence established that the seeds supplied failed to germinate. The first respondent specifically pleaded and strictly proved damages up to TZS 79,800,000, but the award to the second respondent was not supported by specific pleading or proof.
Source excerpt
The trial court erred by failing to evaluate the Appellant's evidence, particularly the email correspondence (Exh.D-4) which established an understanding that a 0.75% facilitation and documentation fee would be charged upfront. Although no binding credit facility agreement was executed, the Respondent's acceptance of the fee and subsequent withdrawal after the Appellant had incurred preparatory expenses created an equitable liability. The deduction was justified as compensation for preparatory work. The awards for loss of profit and general damages were not properly justified or proved and th…
Source excerpt
The DLHT had jurisdiction as the reliefs sought were land ownership; promissory estoppel did not apply due to lack of clear waiver; ownership did not transfer due to breach of payment terms; second appellant was not a bona fide purchaser due to notice of unresolved payment; DLHT properly evaluated the evidence and findings are upheld.
Source excerpt
The High Court upheld repatriation and subsistence rights for a terminated employee, but partly allowed the employer’s counterclaim for outstanding loans and imprests.
Explore more
