Juris

Facts The accused was charged with murder contrary to section 196 of the Penal Code was alleged that she shot her husband in their bedroom. The main line of defence was that the deceased committed suicide. The prosecution called 15 witnesses including a ballistic expert. The prosecution case was mainly based on circumstantial evidence. Held : (i) The accused can only be convicted of an offense on the basis of the strength ofthe prosecution case and not on the basis of the weakness of the defense. (ii) When an accused is charged with an offence his or her guilt is not established or proved if the explanation he or she offers is one which is reasonable and might possibly be true even if the Court is not convinced that it is in fact true. (iii) To ground a conviction on circumstantial evidence, the following principles apply; (a) that evidence must be incapable of more than one interpretation (b) the facts from which an inference of guilt or adverse to the accused is sought to be drawn, m...

 Trust Bank Ltd V. Le – Marsh Enterprises Ltd, Joseph Mbui Magari, and Lawrence Macharia .  In this case, the court ruled that the electronic evidence is admissible in Tanzanian Courts and the same was a departure from the strict rule of best evidence that only primary evidence i.e. original documents are admissible. He further notes that, judges are not to be ignorant of modern n business methods and stay aloof to the mysteries of the computer.  This decision, in his opinion shows the judicial activism and the role of judiciary in filling gaps left by the legislature. The legislature following this decision responded by enacting Electronic Evidence Amendments Act, 2007 which provides for provision for the reception of electronic evidence in courts of law in Tanzania.  The new section added is section 40A, to the Tanzania Evidence Act, 1967 . Inter alia, the section provides that in any criminal proceedings information retrieved from computer systems, networks or sev...

  The application before this Court is a Notice of Motion dated  14 th   November 2013 it is brought Under Order 1, 22, and 51 of the Civil Procedure Rules, 2010, and section 10 (2) of the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, Chapter 43 of the Laws of Kenya and Rule 6 of the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Rules, Section 4 of the privileges and Immunities Act Chapter 179 of the Laws of Kenya, Article 21 and 22 of Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, section 3A, 63E  of the Civil Procedure Act Chapter 21 Laws of Kenya and All Enabling Provision of the Law The applicant seeks the following orders; 1.  The Government of the United Republic of Tanzania be enjoined as an Interested Party in these proceedings. 2.  There be a stay of the execution of the Ex-parte order for attachment of subject matter L.R. 209/13678 at Nairobi issued by the Honourable Court and all consequential orders thereto pending the hearing and determination of th...

  Munyera J.:  The appellant was the petitioner in the Primary Court.  He petitioned against his wife, the respondent for divorce.  He claimed that the respondent had left the matrimonial home since 1981 and sicne then she has not returned.  The respondent G denied that she left the matrimonial home on her own, it was the appellant who had sent her home, that the source of all this trouble is because she is barren, she has not produced a single child since their marriage in 1975.  The trial court granted a decree of divorce and blamed the respondent for staying away for such a long time.  She appealed H to the District Court which reversed the judgement of the trial court and dismissed the appellant's petition as res judicata. In turn the appellant brought this appeal. This case has a history.  In 1981 the appellant filed a divorce petition, Civil Case No. 48/81 same Primary Court.  He alleged that the respondent disa...

 The facts are that the former tenant (Paul kamau) bought a beer store business from appellant (landlord), he converted a house into a lodge which he obtained a license , later he added a bar business thereon and he got a license for the same. The trial court allowed tenant claim in part. The land lord appealed and the tenant cross appealed . Claiming the disallowed part of his claim. The court of appeal allowed the appeal and dismissed the cross appeal the court was of the view that; The list almost all the item are either buit in, or fixed to the land and they constitute fixture. To constitute fixture the article the article mentioned should be let into or united to the land or be substantial connected with the land  or building that is build on it. Therefore wash basin , water tapes thereon ceiling boards fixed to the  house can be termed as fixture.