Court of Appeal of Tanzania: Recent submissions
Now showing items 41-60 of 558
-
MHUBIRI ROGEGA MONG'ATEKO VS. MAK MEDICS LTD CIVIL APPEAL NO. 106 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, MWANZA., 2022-07-19)(i) Upon admitting the liability with common understanding to repay the same, itcannot be said that such termination was un fair. (ii) It is trite law that, a document which is not admitted in evidence cannot be treated ... -
LEONARD DOMINIC RUBUYE t/a RUBUYE AGROCHEMICAL SUPPLIES VS. YARA TANZANIA LIMITED. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 219 OF 2018
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-07-11)Held (i). It is a well settled position that the onus of proving existence or non-existence of any fact lies on the party asserting its existence or non-existence and in civil cases proof is at balance of probabilities ... -
JOHN BARNABA MACHERA VS. NORTH MARA GOLD MINE LIMITED CIVIL APPEAL NO. 204 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, MWANZA., 2022-07-19)i)it is on record that two points of preliminary objection over time limitation were raised in alternative before the predecessor Judge and the decision thereof was delivered. The first preliminary objection was dismissed ... -
NORTH MARA GOLD MINE LIMITED VS. EMMANUEL MWITA MAGESA CIVIL APPEAL NO. 271 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, MWANZA., 2022-07-18)(i) An appellate court, like this one, will only interfere with concurrent findings of fact only if it is satisfied that "they are on the face of it unreasonable or perverse" leading to a miscarriage of justice, or there ... -
LIGHTNESS DAMIANI AND 6 OTHERS VS. SAID KASIM CHAGEKA CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 450/17 OF 2020.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-11-16)(I)In application for leave to appeal the grounds need not only be grounds of appeal but they may be arguable issues which attract the courts attention for having them put in proper legal perspectives. (II)In application ... -
M/S ROKO INVESTMENT CO. LTD TANZANIA ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD CIVIL APPEAL NO. 327 OF 2019
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, TABORA., 2022-11-09): (i) First and foremost, it is our observation that, the suit by the Respondent which is for the recovery of electricity charges amounting to TZS. 84,160,612.93, was properly brought under summary procedure. Under ... -
LAEMTHONG RICE CO. LTD VS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE ZANZIBAR. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 259 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-11-08)Held (i). The Registrar has no powers to alter the judgment and decree of the Court in the execution. -
JNM MINING SERVICES LTD VS. MINERAL ACCESS SYSTEMS TANZANIA LTD. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 395 OF 2019
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-11-07)Held: (i)The function of the law of contract is to provide an effective and fair framework for contractual dealings and it is on that account that the function of courts is to enforce and give effect to the intention of ... -
LEONARD DOMINIC RUBUYE t/a RUBUYE AGROCHEMICAL SUPPLIES VS. YARA TANZANIA LIMITED CIVIL APPEAL NO. 219 OF 2018.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-07-11)Held (i). It is a well settled position that the onus of proving existence or non-existence of any fact lies on the party asserting its existence or non-existence and in civil cases proof is at balance of probabilities ... -
COMMISSIONER GENERAL (TRA) VS. CRJE ESTATE LIMITED. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 370 OF 2021
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2021-10-06)Held: (i)we are of the view that, in as long as it deals with a certificate of incentive under section 17 of the TIA, the authority is relevant in the instant case. Therefore, just like the Tribunal, we hold that, the ... -
LAWRENCE MAGESA t/a JOPEN PHARMACY VS. FATUMA OMARY AND ANOTHER CIVIL APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2019
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-10-05)(i) We wish to preface our discussion by observing that this being a first appeal, we are entitled to review the evidence on record to satisfy ourselves whether the findings by the trial court were correct. This task is ... -
BYTRADE TANZANIA LIMITED VS. ASSENGA AGROVET COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 64 OF 2018.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, MOSHI., 2022-10-07)Held: (i) The true principle of promissory estoppel is where one party has by his words or conduct made to the other a dear and unequivocal promise which is intended to create legal relations or effect a legal relationship ... -
LAWRENCE MAGESA t/a JOPEN PHARMACY VS. FATUMA OMARY. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 333 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-10-05)Held:- (i) We wish to preface our discussion by observing that this being a first appeal, we are entitled to review the evidence on record to satisfy ourselves whether the findings by the trial court were correct. This ... -
MARTIN FREDRICK RAJAB VS. ILEMELA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANOTHER. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 197 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, MWANZA., 2022-07-18)HELD i) Parties are bound by their pleadings and can only succeed according to what he has averred in his plaint and proved in evidence; hence he is not allowed to set up a new case. the appellant was required to parade ... -
METHUSELA ENOKA VS. NATIONAL MICROFINANCE BANK LTD. CIVIL APPEAL No. 266 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, MWANZA., 2022-07-18)Held: (i) Appeal is time barred but the appellantis entitled to exclusion under section 19(2) (3) of the Act without necessarily attaching any document to the memorandum of appeal. (ii) The exclusion is automatic as long ... -
COSTANTINE VICTOR JOHN VS. MUHIMBILI NATIONAL HOSPITAL. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 188/01 OF 2021.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-10-19)Held; The said grounds one, two and four are not grounds of review envisaged under Rule 66 (1) (a) of the Rules as they require the Court to re-asses the evidence. The raised grounds do not depict an obvious or patent ... -
JNM MINING SERVICES LTD VS. MINERAL ACCESS SYSTEMS TANZANIA LTD. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 395 OF 2019
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-11-07)Held: (i)The function of the law of contract is to provide an effective and fair framework for contractual dealings and it is on that account that the function of courts is to enforce and give effect to the intention of ... -
BYTRADE TANZANIA LIMITED VS. ASSENGA AGROVET COMPANY LIMITED AND ISMAIL A. MALLYA. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 64 OF 2018.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, MOSHI., 2022-10-07)Held: (i) The true principle of promissory estoppel is where one party has by his words or conduct made to the other a dear and unequivocal promise which is intended to create legal relations or effect a legal relationship ... -
BRAZAFRIC ENTERPRISES LIMITED VS. KADERES PEASANTS DEVELOPMENT (PLC). CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 421/08 OF 2021.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-10-11)HELD 1.I find that narration of sequence of events alone does not constitute good cause for extension of time, as correctly, in my view, stated by the counsel for the respondent 2.In the light of the above decision, I ... -
ELIAS MASIJA NYANG'ORO AND 2 OTHERS VS. MWANANCHI INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDCIVIL APPEAL No. 278 OF 2019.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-10-19)(i) It is, perhaps, pertinent to observe that, the law in this Country, like the Laws of other jurisdictions, recognizes, that generally the High Court may set aside an ex-parte judgment upon an application being made by ...
