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 Bariadi District Court lacked jurisdiction to try the appellant due to defective prosecutorial consent and certificate of transfer, which failed to specify the offence-creating provisions, rendering the proceedings a nullity.
Source excerpt
The Court of Appeal upheld a conviction for unlawful possession of government trophies, rejecting complaints on procedure, identification, and proof.
The prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was found within the game reserve with government trophies and other prohibited items without a permit; all evidence was properly admitted and the chain of custody maintained; the conviction and sentence are upheld.
Source excerpt
The trial court lacked jurisdiction as the certificate and consent conferring jurisdiction did not reference the relevant charging provisions, rendering the proceedings a nullity.
Source excerpt
Convictions for unlawful entry, hunting, and possession of government trophies were quashed due to non-existent offence under amended law, improper admission of trophy valuation certificate, lack of inventory, and insufficient proof of park boundaries; all convictions and sentences set aside.
Source excerpt
The court convicted the first, second, and eighth accused for unlawful hunting and related firearms offences, and acquitted the remaining accused.
The High Court allowed a criminal appeal, quashing convictions for wildlife offences after finding key prosecution evidence on arrest location and impala meat was not proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was arrested within the statutory boundaries of Serengeti National Park and in possession of government trophies and weapons; conviction under section 21(1)(a) of the NPA was for a non-existent offence; irregular admission of exhibits P2 and P3 further undermined the prosecution's case; doubts raised by the defence were not resolved in the appellant's favour.
Source excerpt
The District Court lacked jurisdiction to try both economic and non-economic offences as the certificate of transfer was wrongly issued under section 12(3) EOCCA instead of section 12(4); further, the improper admission of documentary exhibits rendered the prosecution case insufficient, and a retrial would be unjust as it would allow the prosecution to cure its case defects.
Source excerpt
The prosecution failed to prove the offences of unlawful hunting, possession, and dealing in government trophy against the first, second, and third appellants beyond reasonable doubt; convictions based on retracted confessions without corroboration and on defective charges were unsafe; conviction under a repealed statute is a nullity; only the fourth appellant was proved to be in actual possession of government trophy and his conviction and sentence (with modification) were upheld.
Source excerpt
Explore more
