Probation has always been understood as a trial period. The employee is being assessed. Nothing is guaranteed. If things do not work out and the right process is followed, they part ways cleanly.

The established position reflected that reality. If an employer terminated a probationary employee without following proper procedure, it compensated them for the remaining probation period – not the whole contract. That was proportionate.

The Court of Appeal has now changed that through its decision in Tanzania Social Action Fund (TASAF) and Another vs Ludovicka L.S. Tarimo (Civil Appeal No. 247 of 2024) [2026] TZCA 480 (5 May 2026)

What happened

TASAF hired an employee on a two-year contract at USD 4 355 per month with a six-month probation. Her supervisor never met with her, never told her there were concerns, and filled in her appraisal form alone, without her, before recommending she be let go.

She was terminated on 22 December 2014.

The Court found the procedure under rule 10 of the Labour Code of Good Practice was not followed. The compensation awarded: USD 52 260 – 12 full months of salary for the remainder of the contract.

The problem

That measure of compensation was previously reserved for confirmed employees (ie employees who have successfully completed probation). A probationary employee who had not yet earned confirmation was treated differently – and rightly so. The Court has now collapsed that distinction. Breach procedure during probation on a fixed-term contract, and the rest of the contract must be paid. Not the rest of probation. The whole contract.

Probation was supposed to mean something

It existed precisely because confirmation was not guaranteed. The employer needed time to assess. The employee understood that. The jurisprudence respected that balance by limiting exposure during that assessment window. This decision dismantles that balance. A probationary employee who is procedurally incorrectly assessed now recovers the same, sometimes more, than a confirmed employee wrongfully dismissed. There is no longer a meaningful financial distinction between the two. If the risk is identical, the category is redundant.

What this means for business

Businesses that hire an employee on a three-year contract with six months’ probation, and let them go in month four without proper documentation, are potentially exposed to 30 months of salary. The financial risk is the same as firing a confirmed employee.

Written by Brian Mambosho, Partner, and MohammedZameen Nazarali, Senior Associate, Bowmans Tanzania