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 Court of Appeal quashed a conviction for carnal knowledge after finding the successor magistrate gave no reasons for taking over the trial, causing material prejudice.
The Court of Appeal partly allowed a criminal appeal, quashing three convictions for insufficient identification and reducing the others’ life sentences to 15 years.
Irregular succession of magistrates and improper admission of evidence rendered proceedings a nullity; retrial not appropriate as it would allow prosecution to fill gaps in their case.
Source excerpt
Failure to comply with mandatory procedural requirements for succession of magistrates and judgment delivery constitutes irregularity; proceedings, judgment, and decree are nullified.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal held that the trial judgment was a nullity because the original magistrate did not sign it and the successor magistrate failed to comply with section 214(1) of the CPA.
The failure to record reasons for the change of magistrates at the sentencing stage deprived the successor magistrate of jurisdiction, rendering the proceedings a nullity and prejudicing the appellant's right to a fair trial.
Source excerpt
The failure to record reasons for the change of magistrates at the sentencing stage was a procedural irregularity under section 214(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, resulting in lack of jurisdiction for the successor magistrate and rendering the proceedings and sentence a nullity. The appellant was prejudiced and did not receive a fair trial.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal quashed convictions after finding the interpreter was not sworn, rendering the criminal trial a nullity and leaving no admissible evidence.
The Court of Appeal nullified the trial after finding that magistrates were changed mid-trial without reasons, contrary to section 214(1) of the CPA.
The conviction was quashed due to serious procedural irregularities: failure to comply with mandatory requirements on succession of magistrates and child witness evidence, and premature closure of the prosecution case, rendering the trial unfair.
Source excerpt
Explore more
