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 upheld liability for an employee’s fatal shooting during a cash transfer, but reduced the damages award after correcting the assessment method.
The High Court lacks jurisdiction over tortious claims arising from employment relationships, which are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the CMA or Labour Court. The cause of action arose in 2017 when the injury occurred, making the suit time barred under the Law of Limitation Act. Section 30(1) of the Workers Compensation Act does not apply as the alleged negligence was not the cause of the injury but related to delayed reporting.
Source excerpt
The District Court correctly held it lacked jurisdiction because the appellant's claim was not properly instituted as a civil suit for negligence or breach of statutory duty, but rather as a compensation claim under the Workers Compensation Act, 2008, using the wrong procedure. The exception under section 30(1) did not apply as the pleadings did not establish civil liability or comply with the Civil Procedure Code.
Source excerpt
High Court appeal allowed: the trial court’s refusal of compensation was set aside and the appellant was awarded Tshs. 20,000,000/= for workplace injury.
The trial court erred in holding it had no jurisdiction, as the Workers Compensation Act, 2008 does not preclude civil claims for negligence against employers. The plaintiff's claim was based on alleged negligence, not statutory compensation, and thus the Resident Magistrate’s Court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
Source excerpt
The trial court erred in holding it lacked jurisdiction; the Workers Compensation Act, 2008 does not bar civil claims for negligence against an employer. The plaintiff's claim was based on alleged negligence, not statutory compensation, and the Magistrate's Court had jurisdiction to hear the suit.
Source excerpt
The lower court erred in holding that it lacked jurisdiction, as the Workers Compensation Act, 2008 does not oust the court's jurisdiction over civil claims for negligence; the plaintiff's claim was based on alleged negligence, not statutory compensation, and thus the suit was properly before the court.
Source excerpt
The Magistrate’s Court erred in holding it lacked jurisdiction; the Workers Compensation Act, 2008 does not bar a civil suit for damages based on employer negligence, and the plaintiff’s claim was not limited to statutory compensation but alleged negligence, thus the suit should proceed on its merits.
Source excerpt
The High Court nullified proceedings in a district court negligence claim, holding the suit was not properly instituted because the earlier no-jurisdiction finding remained intact.
The applicant, being a layman, followed the court's directives and was misled by the ruling of the Resident Magistrate, which constitutes sufficient reason for the delay. The confusion and reliance on official advice justified the extension of time.
Source excerpt
Explore more
