Court of Appeal of Tanzania: Recent submissions
Now showing items 121-140 of 627
-
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 ... -
CATS NET LIMITED VS. TANZANIA COMMUNICATION REGULATORY AUTHORITY CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 526/01 OF 2020.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-10-04)1.The assertion on Mr. Cosatta's sickness becomes insignificant because even if it is true that he was sick to the extent of not being able to enter appearance, still he was supposed to so inform the Court before or at the ... -
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)(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 to ... -
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)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 evidence ... -
BULYANHULU GOLD MINES LIMITED VS. PASCHARY ANDREW STANNY CIVIL APPEAL NO. 281 OF 2021.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, SHINYANGA., 2022-07-21)The court was on the view that it is appropriate, to lay ground as for this Court's position generally, on issues of taking evidence from witnesses in all courts. Before taking evidence from a witness in a court of law, ... -
STATE OIL TANZANIA LIMITED VS. EQUITY BANK TANZANIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 426/16 OF 2022
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-11-15)(i) Even if the respondent would have written the letter of reminder to the registrar of the high court within 14 days after expiry of 90 days still, he would not have supplied the requested copy of the proceedings the ... -
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)(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. (ii) The ... -
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)(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 to ... -
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 ... -
STATE OIL TANZANIA LIMITED VS. EQUITY BANK TANZANIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 426/16 OF 2022
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-11-15)(i) Even if the respondent would have written the letter of reminder to the registrar of the high court within 14 days after expiry of 90 days still, he would not have supplied the requested copy of the proceedings the ... -
COMPUTER LOGIX LIMITED AND ANOTHER VS. ZAMZAM SHADADIISSA AND SEIF ISSACCIVIL APPLICATION NO. 538/01 OF 2018. FIKIRINI (Administrators of the esof the late FIKIRINI ISSA KOCHO) tate
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-07-29)1.Exclusion of time spent in preparation and supply of a certified copy of proceedings apply only to an appeal, not an application. Thus, the provision of Rule 90(1) can not be invoked where the applicant fails to lodge ... -
ALEX MSAMA MWITA VS. EMMANUEL NASUZWA KITUNDU AND ANOTHER CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 538/17 OF 2020.
(THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA, DAR ES SALAAM., 2022-10-20)(i) The applicant did not comply with the mandatory requirement of the law which requires service of the notice of motion to be done within fourteen (14) days from the date of filing and this omission as the court have ...
