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 revoked a probate grant after finding the will excluded some children of the deceased without justification and was discriminatory.
The court lacks jurisdiction to revoke a resealing order based on alleged defects in the original foreign probate grant; objections to resealing must be raised before the order is issued, and Section 49 does not apply to resealing orders.
Source excerpt
The Applicant failed to prove that the proceedings leading to the grant of probate to the Respondent were defective in substance. The will was properly propounded, the Respondent complied with legal requirements, and the absence of a certificate of death was sufficiently explained by affidavit. The existence of a prior grant to the Applicant, which was subsequently revoked, does not render the Respondent's grant defective. The application for revocation is without merit and is dismissed.
Source excerpt
The application is misconceived as the law does not permit revocation of probate or challenge to the validity of the Will after probate has been granted; the applicant failed to pursue the caveat procedure at the appropriate stage; the Will was accepted as valid by the court and executors were properly appointed.
Source excerpt
The High Court held it had jurisdiction to hear a probate-related application because it arose from a different cause and there was no proof of a pending appeal affecting it.
The High Court erred in revoking the probate and appointing the respondents as administrators because the appellant had already completed his duties as executor, exhibited the required inventory and accounts, and was functus officio. There was no operative probate to revoke or office to succeed to. Any allegations of fraud or misappropriation should be pursued through separate civil or criminal proceedings, not by revocation of probate.
Source excerpt
The High Court erred in revoking the appellant's probate and appointing the respondents as administrators because the appellant had already completed his duties as executor, filed the required inventory and accounts, and was functus officio. There was no operative probate to revoke or office to which the respondents could succeed. Any claims of misappropriation or fraud should be pursued through separate civil or criminal proceedings, not by revocation or new appointment.
Source excerpt
Explore more
