Tanzania Case Law

RULING ON COMPETENCY OF PETITION JOHN SEKA VS ATTORNEY GENERAL FINAL NEW

Court

TANZLII

The petition is incompetent because the petitioner failed to show in his affidavit of admissibility how he is personally affected by the impugned subsidiary legislation, as required by section 4(2) of BRADEA, following the 2020 amendment. The requirement is mandatory and not satisfied by mere public interest claims or by citing Article 26(2) of the Constitution. The court's jurisdiction is impaired by this noncompliance, and the petition must be struck out.

Source excerpt

• Locus standi
• Constitutional petition procedure
• Electoral law
• Subsidiary legislation
• Public interest litigation

Read case analysis

judgment Maganya New

Court

TANZLII

The High Court's jurisdiction to hear and determine constitutional petitions is strictly limited by statutory timelines. The ninety-day period for hearing and determination starts from the date of assignment by the Principal Judge or Judge in-charge, not from the date of determination of competence. Once ninety days lapse, the court's jurisdiction ceases by effluxion of time. Rule 15(1) of the Rules is inconsistent with Section 10 of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act and must be amended to conform to the parent law.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Statutory interpretation
• Subsidiary legislation
• Time limits
• Constitutional challenge

Read case analysis

jacquline westring others vs the attorney general another 2023 tzhc 19122 11 july 2023

Court

TZHC

The petition is frivolous because the alleged discrimination in Regulation 9(1) of the Immigration Regulations has been cured by amendment (GN No. 541 of 2015) replacing 'wife' with 'spouse', and section 39(1) of the Immigration Act, when read with the Interpretation of Laws Act, includes both genders. There is no inconsistency between the principal Act and the subsidiary legislation, and the petition lacks legal basis.

Source excerpt

• Gender discrimination
• Subsidiary legislation
• Statutory interpretation
• Basic rights enforcement

Read case analysis

RULING ALEXANDER BARUNGUZA PETITION Misc Civil Cause No 1 of 2023 SIGNED FINAL NEW

Court

TANZLII

The High Court has jurisdiction to determine the constitutionality of subsidiary legislation where a violation of basic rights is alleged. The Law School of Tanzania By-laws, to the extent they do not provide students the right to be heard on appeal, contravene Article 13(6)(a) of the Constitution and are unconstitutional. The applicant's claims for damages are unproven and unsupported by pleadings.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair hearing
• Judicial review
• Subsidiary legislation
• Student appeals
• Access to information

Read case analysis

legal and human rights centre others vs minister for information culture and sports others 2019 tzhc 2032 9 january 2019

Court

TZHC

The High Court mostly upheld Tanzania’s Online Content Regulations, but quashed the regulation’s definition of “content” as inconsistent with the parent Act.

• Judicial review
• Subsidiary legislation
• Ultra vires
• Natural justice
• Freedom of expression
• Regulation of online content

Read case analysis

gerard mhami vs amin abdallah 2017 tzhc 2060 18 august 2017

Court

TZHC

Conviction and sentence based on a non-existing law renders the charge defective, affects the court's competency, and occasions failure of justice; thus, the conviction and sentence must be quashed.

Source excerpt

• Defective charge
• Subsidiary legislation
• Jurisdiction
• Failure of justice

Read case analysis

20151027 TZHC Dar es Salaam2

Court

TZHC

The High Court held that Regulation 4(3) of the Transport Licensing Regulations was inconsistent with the parent Act and void, so the lower fine under the Act applied.

• Subsidiary legislation
• Statutory interpretation
• Regulatory fines
• Conflict between statute and regulations
• Statutory-interpretation
• Subsidiary-legislation

Read case analysis

John Seka v Minister of State in President Office Local Government Authorities and AG Ruling on PO

Court

TANZLII

The petition is incompetent as it is barred by res judicata due to the Court of Appeal's decision in Mtikila No. 3, which settled the issue of independent candidates in Tanzanian elections. The High Court is not functus officio in relation to the previous judicial review application, but the matter is not justiciable as the legal question has already been conclusively determined. The petition cannot proceed as it seeks to relitigate an issue already settled by a superior court.

Source excerpt

• Res judicata
• Functus officio
• Independent candidates
• Local government elections
• Subsidiary legislation
• Public interest litigation

Read case analysis

narcis r mbarara vs minister for regional administration and local government others 2008 tzhc 320 14 february 2008

Court

TZHC

Leave to seek certiorari was struck out as premature because the applicant had not exhausted the appeal remedy preserved by subsidiary legislation.

• Certiorari
• Exhaustion of remedies
• Subsidiary legislation
• Repeal and savings provisions
• Exhaustion-of-remedies
• Subsidiary-legislation

Read case analysis

N

Court

TZHC

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal after finding the charge for illegal marketing of maize was defective and prejudicial, quashing the conviction and setting aside sentence.

• Defective charge
• Subsidiary legislation
• Burden of proof
• Miscarriage of justice
• Defective-charge
• Subsidiary-legislation

Read case analysis