Humiliated at supermarket

Last week, I stopped by a supermarket after work. I picked up a bottle of wine and held it in my hand while scrolling through my phone. I got a call from my sister and, distracted, walked out without realizing I hadn’t paid. Security stopped me at the exit, accused me of theft, and dragged me to a back room. I tried to explain it was a mistake, but they called the police. I was held for hours, made to pay for the wine, and sign a statement. I wasn’t charged, but I left feeling humiliated. Now I am worried, will this affect my record? Was I treated fairly?
JB, Dodoma

We are truly sorry you had to endure such a distressing and humiliating experience, assuming what you are saying is the truth. Being accused of theft in a public setting can be emotionally overwhelming, especially when the situation stems from a genuine mistake. Let’s unpack your situation from a legal standpoint. Under Section 258 of the Penal Code [Cap 16 R.E. 2023], theft is defined as the unlawful taking of property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of it. The key element here is ‘intent.’ In criminal law, intent is not assumed it must be proven. If your actions were accidental and you had no intention of stealing the item, then legally, it may not meet the threshold for criminal liability. From your account, it appears you were distracted and did not consciously decide to leave without paying. This distinction is crucial.

Since you were released without formal charges or being taken to Court, it is likely that this incident may not appear as a criminal record. However, the fact that you signed a statement is concerning. That statement could be used as evidence if the matter is revisited or if the supermarket decides to pursue civil action. In future, always insist on the presence of a legal counsel before signing anything.

Regarding your detention, police are permitted under section 14 of the Criminal Procedure Act [Cap 20 R.E. 2023] to hold individuals under suspicion of committing an offence. However, this power is not absolute. Your constitutional rights particularly the right to dignity, the presumption of innocence, and protection from arbitrary detention must be upheld. If you were held for an excessive period, denied access to legal counsel, or treated in a degrading manner, those actions may constitute a violation of your rights under the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, especially Articles 13 and 15. Your lawyer can you further.

Sued over my husband’s estate

I am a widow living in a house my late husband bought in 2006. We paid the full price, took possession, and even got municipal consent for transfer. But the seller vanished before paying Capital Gains Tax, so the transfer was not registered. Years later, both my husband and the seller passed away. Now, the seller’s estate administrator has filed a case against me personally claiming I am trespassing, demanding rent and damages. The High Court ruled against me, calling me a trespasser. I have appealed, arguing I was wrongly sued in my personal capacity instead of the administrators of my husband’s estate who were appointed by the Courts after my husband died. My lawyer says we have a strong case, but after losing at the High Court, I am shaken. What does the law say about my situation? Please guide me.
EM, Dar es Salaam

Your situation is deeply unfortunate, and we understand how emotionally and legally exhausting this must be. Under Tanzanian law, once a person passes away, their estate is managed by Court-appointed administrators (where there is no will) or executors (where there is a will). The process is governed by the Probate and Administration of Estates Act [Cap 352 R.E. 2023] (the Act).  Section 71 of the Act states that only the administrators of a deceased person’s estate have the legal capacity to sue or be sued in matters concerning that estate. This means that once your husband passed away and administrators were appointed, any legal action concerning property he owned should have been directed at those administrators not at you personally.

Further, the principle of legal capacity is fundamental in civil procedure. Courts have consistently held that suing someone who lacks the legal standing to represent an estate renders the proceedings incompetent. This includes judgments, orders, and any consequential actions. In your case, the High Court’s decision may be invalidated on appeal if the appellate Court agrees that you were wrongly sued. According to our case law, this procedural flaw is not a minor technicality it goes to the heart of the legal process. We advise you to continue working with your lawyer on the appeal.

No Contract, just receipts

During the 2020/2021 cashewnut season, my licensed warehouse was awarded a tender by a cooperative union to store raw cashewnuts. We received the nuts, issued warehouse receipts, and stored them without signing any formal contract with the union. Months later, the union claimed the nuts had shrunk and were unmarketable. They accused us of breach of contract and demanded compensation. Under pressure, I paid TZS 40 million, especially since criminal charges were being considered against some of my directors. I feel like I was treated unfairly. Was there even a binding contract if we never signed one? Please guide me.
KJ, Mtwara

Your concern is both valid and common in commercial practice. Many business relationships begin informally, based on trust and mutual understanding, but when disputes arise, the absence of a formal contract can lead to confusion and vulnerability.

Under the Law of Contract Act [Cap 345 R.E. 2023], a contract does not need to be in writing to be enforceable. What matters is whether there was an offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations. In your case, the cooperative union delivered goods to your warehouse, and you accepted them and issued warehouse receipts. These receipts are not mere acknowledgments they are legal instruments that establish a bailment relationship and define your duty to safely store the goods. By issuing those receipts, you assumed responsibility for the condition and safekeeping of the cashewnuts. This conduct creates a binding contract, even in the absence of a signed document. The doctrine of estoppel further prevents you from denying the existence of a contract after acting on it. Courts often rely on such conduct to infer contractual obligations. Consult your lawyer to assess for further guidance.