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 overruled a preliminary objection, holding that statutory notice to sue the Government was not a prerequisite for a Mareva injunction application.
The applicant failed to establish a prima facie case as he was not lawfully leased the land, the authority permitting his occupation was revoked, and he failed to meet conditions for alternative tenancy. His inability to pay for the alternative lease does not entitle him to continued occupation. No irreparable loss or balance of convenience in his favour was established. Application dismissed with costs.
Source excerpt
Applicants failed to demonstrate a strong prima facie case or good and arguable case for ownership of the disputed land, failed to show irreparable harm or that granting the injunction would be just and justifiable, and did not rebut evidence of respondents' lawful possession and third-party lease.
Source excerpt
The High Court granted a mareva injunction pending expiry of statutory notice, finding a prima facie land dispute, likely irreparable loss, and balance of convenience for the applicant.
The applicant failed to establish a real and imminent risk to the subject matter, as the alleged harm (allocation of land to villagers) had already occurred. The applicant's loss, being limited to planted trees for business, is compensable in monetary terms. The conditions for grant of a mareva injunction, particularly imminent risk, were not met.
Source excerpt
The High Court Land Division granted a Mareva injunction to preserve possession of disputed land pending expiry of the 90-day statutory notice to sue government.
The High Court overruled preliminary objections over an amended plaint and lack of statutory notice, holding leave had been granted and joinder was by court order.
The High Court granted a Mareva injunction to preserve disputed land pending expiry of statutory notice, finding a prima facie case, irreparable loss, and greater hardship to applicants.
The High Court granted a Mareva injunction restraining demolition of a wall on disputed land, pending expiry of the 90-day statutory notice to sue the Government.
The applicants met all three preconditions for a Mareva injunction: there is a serious question to be tried regarding ownership and rights over the land; applicants would suffer irreparable loss if evicted or their properties demolished; and the balance of convenience favors the applicants as they would suffer greater hardship than the respondents. The lack of a counter affidavit from respondents means the factual allegations are unchallenged.
Source excerpt
Explore more
