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The appellant was charged under a repealed statute, rendering the proceedings, conviction, and sentence a nullity; failure to cite the proper and valid law in the charge is a fatal defect that cannot be cured and vitiates the entire trial.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal quashed a rape conviction because the appellant was charged under a repealed provision, found the trial unfair, and declined a retrial.
The High Court held that the Temeke District Court lacked jurisdiction over a filed employment claim after the transitional period expired, but the claim was not time-barred.
The Temeke District Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter as the Employment Act, Cap 366, had been repealed and the transitional period expired before the suit was filed; however, the respondents were not time-barred due to the exclusion of time spent in prior proceedings under section 21 of the Law of Limitation Act.
Source excerpt
The High Court held it lacked jurisdiction over a labour dispute because labour matters were exclusively vested in labour courts under the Employment and Labour Relations Act.
The High Court held that the labour dispute could not proceed in the ordinary courts because jurisdiction lay with the Labour Courts under the Employment and Labour Relations Act.
The High Court dismissed an appeal in an employment dispute, holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction after repeal of the Security of Employment Act.
The High Court dismissed an appeal in a labour dispute, holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the relevant statute had been repealed.
The appeal is incompetent in law as it was filed in the wrong division of the High Court contrary to the requirements of the Land Disputes Courts Act, Cap. 216, which is now operative.
Source excerpt
The appeal is incompetent in law because it was filed in the wrong division of the High Court after the repeal of the relevant provision and the coming into force of the Land Disputes Courts Act.
Source excerpt
Explore more
