RUHINDA JUDGMENT
The High Court allowed CRDB Bank’s appeal, finding the first respondent was not proved to live in the mortgaged house and the bank was not negligent.
- Matrimonial home
- Spousal consent
- Mortgage
- Collateral
- Negligence
- Matrimonial-home
Tanzania Source-linked decisions Coverage checked
Tanzania Case Law
Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
- Courts on this page
- 2 court collections
- Last checked
Search and filter Tanzania case law
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
11
The respondent's evidence was based on expunged exhibits and hearsay, failing the burden of proof. The appellants' evidence was stronger and supported by direct witnesses and valid documents. The DLHT's decision was quashed and the appeal allowed.
Source excerpt
- Stamp duty
- Spousal consent
- Hearsay evidence
- Limitation of actions
- Admissibility of evidence
- Ownership of land
TEBELO JUDGMENT
The first respondent failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that she was lawfully married to the second respondent as required by law; the letter from the Street Chairman is not sufficient proof of marriage under section 55 of the Law of Marriage Act; contradictions between pleadings and testimony undermined her case; therefore, the trial Tribunal erred in its findings and decision.
Source excerpt
- Matrimonial property
- Spousal consent
- Mortgage validity
- Burden of proof
- Pleadings and evidence
JUDGMENT OF DOUGLAS MAGOMBOLA VS SOPHIA MWENDA
The appellant failed to prove that the disputed property was matrimonial property or that he had a registrable interest. The property was registered solely in the first respondent's name, and the second respondent conducted due diligence before purchase. Procedural omissions did not prejudice the parties. Therefore, the sale without the appellant's consent was lawful.
Source excerpt
- Matrimonial property
- Spousal consent
- Land registration
- Burden of proof
- Due diligence in property transactions
Simon Kamonyela Mwipagi
The appeal was allowed because the evidence presented by the 1st respondent was hearsay and inadmissible, as his agent could not testify on his behalf. The trial tribunal's decision was reversed since the appellant's claim stood uncontested by direct evidence, and the sale of land by the 2nd respondent to the appellant was upheld as lawful.
Source excerpt
- Matrimonial property
- Spousal consent
- Power of attorney
- Sale of land
- Hearsay evidence
SCAN 18728
The applicant satisfied all three mandatory conditions for a temporary injunction as set out in Attilio vs. Mbowe (1969) HCD, and the application was not contested by the respondents.
Source excerpt
- Temporary injunction
- Matrimonial property
- Mortgage
- Spousal consent
Tilu Nyoka
The sale of matrimonial land without the appellant's spousal consent and without corroborating evidence from witnesses is legally unestablished and a nullity; the respondent cannot claim valid ownership over the disputed land.
Source excerpt
- Matrimonial property
- Spousal consent
- Customary land ownership
- Registration of title
maryam nassor vs abla estate developers agency limited others 2024 tzca 168 7 march 2024
A decree dismissing a suit does not confer any enforceable right and is not executable; therefore, an application for stay of execution based on such a decree is misconceived and must be struck out.
Source excerpt
- Stay of execution
- Matrimonial property
- Spousal consent
- Auction of property
- Preliminary objection
asile ally said vs irene redentha emmanuel soka another 2024 tzca 33 8 february 2024
The suit house, acquired during the subsistence of marriage, was matrimonial property regardless of registration or direct financial contribution. Disposition of such property without spousal consent is void under the Law of Marriage Act and Land Act. The appellant, aware of the marital relationship, failed to obtain consent, rendering the sale null and void. Costs were properly awarded to the successful party.
Source excerpt
- Matrimonial property
- Spousal consent
- Void sale
- Division of assets
- Costs of litigation
land appeal no
The Tribunal's decision was vitiated by procedural irregularities in the site visit, failure to establish valid title transfer, lack of spousal consent, and reliance on unsupported oral authorization. The Respondent failed to prove ownership to the required legal standard, and the Tribunal misapplied legal principles governing land transactions.
Source excerpt
- Site visit procedure
- Title transfer
- Spousal consent
- Burden of proof
Explore more