Tanzania Case Law

CIVIL APPEAL NO 457 OF 2021 GANJAGA LAMECK KAFWIMBA VS SCANIA TANZANIA LIMITED

Court

TANZLII

The appellant's claim for subsistence allowance was res judicata because it was part of the repatriation expenses awarded by the ICT, and any further claim should have been raised during execution proceedings, not in a separate suit before the CMA. The law requires all questions relating to execution of a decree to be determined by the executing court, and the doctrine of res judicata precludes re-litigation of such matters.

Source excerpt

• Res judicata
• Subsistence allowance
• Repatriation expenses
• Execution of judgment

Read case analysis

JUDGMENT CIVIL APPEAL NO

Court

TANZLII

The respondent's termination was unfair for want of reasons as required by law, and compensation for unfair termination was properly pleaded in the referral form, justifying the award of salary for the unexpired period of the contract, but the calculation must be based on the contractual salary. The claim for repatriation expenses to Iringa was not supported by the employment contract, which specified Morogoro as the place of recruitment.

Source excerpt

• Unfair termination
• Fixed term contracts
• Compensation for unfair dismissal
• Repatriation expenses
• Pleadings and reliefs

Read case analysis

alex lwabinwa vs bp tanzania limited 2019 tzca 575 21 june 2019

Court

TZCA

The Court of Appeal struck out the appeal as incompetent because the notice of appeal was filed years out of time and no extension of time had been granted.

• Appeal time limits
• Extension of time
• Repatriation expenses
• Terminal benefits
• Appeal-time-limits
• Extension-of-time

Read case analysis

elidhiaha fadhili vs the executive director mbeya district council 2014 tzca 186 28 october 2014

Court

TZCA

The appellant is entitled to subsistence allowance only from 1/1/2004 to 13/9/2004 at the rate of 15,000/= per day for himself and his wife, and 7,500/= per day for each of his two children, as the applicable law is the repealed Employment Act (Cap 366 -R.E 2002), and the appellant failed to prove entitlement to a higher rate or longer period. Claims based on inapplicable law and unsubstantiated rates are dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Subsistence allowance
• Repatriation expenses
• Retrospective application of law
• Burden of proof
• General damages

Read case analysis

victoria fisheries co ltd vs julius jwangi another 2007 tzhc 418 11 september 2007

Court

TZHC

The High Court dismissed an employment appeal over repatriation expenses and allowance claims, holding that the respondent did not meet the statutory conditions.

• Repatriation expenses
• Substance allowance
• Oral contract
• Burden of proof
• Employment benefits
• Employment-law

Read case analysis

asha abdallah vs general manager keko madawa 2007 tzhc 316 6 february 2007

Court

TZHC

The High Court dismissed an employment appeal over repatriation expenses, July 1994 wages, and 13 years’ gratuity, finding no entitlement under the contract or applicable law.

• Repatriation expenses
• Gratuity
• Contract of employment
• Termination of employment
• Employment-law
• Labour-law

Read case analysis

20061129 TZCA Dar es Salaam

Court

TZCA

The High Court judgment only awarded subsistence allowance based on monthly salary for the period of delay, not both salaries and allowance; the decree should be amended to reflect this.

Source excerpt

• Terminal benefits
• Subsistence allowance
• Decree amendment
• Repatriation expenses

Read case analysis

attorney general vs yakuti others 2006 tzca 8 25 september 2006

Court

TZCA

The High Court judgment only awarded subsistence allowance for the period of delayed terminal benefits payment, not both monthly salaries and subsistence allowance; the error was in the decree, not the judgment.

Source excerpt

• Terminal benefits
• Subsistence allowance
• Decree amendment
• Retrenchment
• Repatriation expenses

Read case analysis

20051108 TZHC Dar es Salaam

Court

TZHC

The High Court allowed the appeal, holding the employer could pay statutory compensation instead of reinstating the employee and was not liable for repatriation or subsistence claims.

• Termination of employment
• Statutory compensation
• Repatriation expenses
• Subsistence allowance
• Employment-law
• Termination-of-employment

Read case analysis

20050531 TZHC Dr es Salaam

Court

TZHC

Plaintiffs were entitled to terminal benefits calculated at the minimum wage prevailing at the date of termination (March 1997), not at the outdated scale; they were underpaid and not paid promptly; subsistence allowances are payable as claimed.

Source excerpt

• Terminal benefits
• Minimum wage
• Subsistence allowance
• Repatriation expenses

Read case analysis