|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| December 2006 |
|
|
A district court lacked jurisdiction over a commercial insurance claim exceeding Tshs.30,000,000; appeal allowed.
Jurisdiction — point of jurisdiction may be raised at any stage including on appeal; Magistrates Courts Act — definition of "commercial case" and pecuniary limits; District Court lacks jurisdiction in commercial cases exceeding Tshs.30,000,000; uncertain contingent or daily- rate claims cannot be used to fix pecuniary jurisdiction; ex parte judgment void if court lacks jurisdiction.
|
12 December 2006 |
|
Jurisdiction may be raised anytime; District Court lacked jurisdiction over a commercial indemnity claim exceeding Tshs.30,000,000.
Jurisdiction – Issue of jurisdiction can be raised at any stage including on appeal; Magistrates Courts Act s.40(3)(b) – District Courts lack jurisdiction over commercial cases exceeding Tshs.30,000,000; Pecuniary jurisdiction – indeterminate future-dated daily loss claims cannot be used to inflate jurisdictional value; Commercial nature – insurer indemnity claims are commercial matters.
|
12 December 2006 |
| November 2006 |
|
|
Computer-generated account statements, served on the debtor and responded to, can sustain a claim for unpaid parts and services; claimed subsequent payment credited.
Commercial law – recovery of unpaid invoices – admissibility and probative value of computer-generated account statements without accompanying job cards – Order VII r.2 Civil Procedure Code and sufficiency of plaint – deduction for subsequent payment.
|
4 November 2006 |
| October 2006 |
|
|
A verification clause missing verifier name, place and date is a curable procedural defect; amendment ordered, not striking out.
Verification clause — defects (absence of verifier’s name, place and date) — Order VI r 15(3) CPC — procedural defect curable by amendment — plaint not to be struck out.
|
31 October 2006 |
|
Stay refused: respondent not party to arbitration clause and applicant had taken steps in the proceedings.
* Arbitration Act s.6 – stay of proceedings – requirements: parties to submission or persons claiming under them, no step taken in proceedings, readiness to arbitrate.* Scope of "person claiming under" – subsidiary/assignee/representative relationship required; independent parties not caught.* "A step in the proceedings" – includes applications to court (e.g., variation, review, interlocutory applications) which bring matter closer to determination.* Inherent jurisdiction/Civil Procedure (Arbitration) Rules – court may refer to arbitration only where parties agree; cannot force arbitration absent agreement.
|
30 October 2006 |
|
Sale to the auctioneer’s employee breached Order 21 rule 71, justifying nullification and re-auction to protect the decree-holder.
Civil Procedure – Execution sale – Order 21 r.71 prohibition on persons with duties in connection with sale bidding; auctioneer’s associate (driver) barred from purchasing. Civil Procedure – Setting aside sale – Order 21 r.88 requires material irregularity/fraud and substantial injury; lower sale price and favouritism satisfy requirement. Public auction – conflict of interest and rule against bias; illegality v. irregularity distinction.
|
26 October 2006 |
|
An unendorsed chamber summons and affidavit do not properly move the court and the application was struck out.
* Advocates Act s.44(1) – endorsement/signature requirement for instruments prepared by advocates.
* Civil procedure – validity of chamber summons and affidavit – effect of lack of endorsement.
* Court of Appeal authority – need for signature on affidavits to properly move the court.
* Costs – no costs where defect raised by court suo motu.
|
26 October 2006 |
|
A decree holder must prove a judgment debtor had means and acted in bad faith before committal to civil prison.
Civil procedure — Execution — Committal to civil prison under s.44(1) and O.XXI r.35/39 — Where debtor appears O.XXI r.39 applies — Decree holder bears burden to prove present ability to pay and bad faith — Dishonoured cheque insufficient without proof of means.
|
20 October 2006 |
| September 2006 |
|
|
Temporary injunction granted to prevent transfer and removal of factory assets pending determination of the main suit.
Interim injunction — restraining registration/transfer and removal of factory assets pending trial — Atilio v Mbowe principles applied: prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience — injunction granted.
|
26 September 2006 |
|
Temporary injunction granted for alleged trade mark infringement and passing off due to prima facie case and irreparable goodwill loss.
Interim injunctions; trade mark infringement and passing off; prima facie case; irreparable loss of goodwill; competing trade mark registrations and allegations of bad faith; balance of convenience.
|
8 September 2006 |
| August 2006 |
|
|
Court granted an interim injunction protecting the applicant’s access to project premises, equipment and documents.
Interim injunction — prima facie case — irreparable harm — balance of convenience — preservation of access to contracted premises, equipment and documentation — application under certificate of urgency (Atilio v Mbowe principles).
|
28 August 2006 |
| July 2006 |
|
|
Certified prior judicial proceedings may be admitted late where no prejudice is shown and documents are above suspicion.
Civil Procedure — Order XIII Rule 2 — meaning of "good cause"; late production of documents; certified judicial proceedings above suspicion; admission where no prejudice shown; discretion to admit to ensure fair trial.
|
27 July 2006 |
| June 2006 |
|
|
Judicial review and mandamus denied where applicant failed mandatory bid requirement and Appeals Authority dismissed appeal.
Public procurement — mandatory bid requirements — whether a High Court order can substitute for Manufacturer's Authorisation — judicial review vs. finality of procurement — availability of compensation where Appeals Authority dismisses complaint (s.82(4)(f), s.85 PPA).
|
30 June 2006 |
|
A lower court cannot reopen a Court of Appeal decision and execution requires certified proof of payment.
Civil procedure – Execution of decree – Requirement for affidavit and certification of payment under Order XXI CPC; Functus officio – Lower court cannot reopen matters decided by Court of Appeal; Proper remedy against appellate adjustment is review/revision at appellate court.
|
20 June 2006 |
|
Application dismissed after supporting affidavit was struck out for lacking verification clause and proper jurat.
Affidavit formalities; verification clause and jurat requirements; Notaries Public and Commissioners for Oaths Ordinance s.8; incurably defective affidavit; striking out affidavit; dismissal of unsupported application.
|
5 June 2006 |
|
Suit dismissed with costs where plaintiff failed to deposit security for costs within fixed time and gave no justification for delay.
Security for costs – Order XXV r.2(1) CPC – mandatory deposit within fixed time – late telegraphic transfer without leave insufficient – need for prior application or satisfactory reasons to depart – dismissal with costs.
|
2 June 2006 |
|
Default under a consent judgment permits execution by attachment and sale even if the title was not formally mortgaged.
Execution – attachment and sale of immovable property – Order XXI r.53 Civil Procedure Code – effect of consent judgment and repayment schedule – default under settlement – deposit of title deed as additional security/equitable mortgage – stay of sale refused.
|
2 June 2006 |
| May 2006 |
|
|
Leave to defend summary suit granted despite unverified counter‑affidavit; defect treated as curable and triable issues found.
Civil procedure – summary suit – leave to appear and defend under Order XXXV; affidavit formalities – verification clause – curable defect; requirement of notice before raising preliminary objection; avoidance of technicalities defeating substantial justice (Article 107A(2)(e)).
|
23 May 2006 |
|
Court found defendant negligent, awarded Tshs.35,215,367 and Tshs.5,000,000; insurer not liable for failure to be timely notified.
* Tort — Negligence — wrongful parking causing collision; criminal conviction under s.43A Evidence Act as evidence of negligence. * Contributory negligence — burden on defendant to prove contributory fault; absent here. * Damages — total loss valuation: use of import/SGS documents, adjustment for currency devaluation and depreciation; special damages must be pleaded and strictly proved. * Insurance — existence of cover note/estoppel; insurer’s liability depends on notice and policy terms; failure to notify claimant’s loss can relieve insurer of indemnity.
|
12 May 2006 |
| April 2006 |
|
|
Occupier's failure to justify continued possession warranted court-ordered eviction to give vacant possession to purchaser.
Eviction — Occupier's burden to show reasons to resist eviction — Failure to justify continued occupation — Order for eviction to give vacant possession to purchaser — Immediate effect.
|
25 April 2006 |
| March 2006 |
|
|
Allegations of non‑disclosure or alteration of insured risk are factual and must be tried, not resolved as preliminary points of law.
* Civil procedure – preliminary objections – must raise pure points of law and cannot depend on disputed facts requiring trial evidence.
* Insurance law – non-disclosure and material alteration of risk – factual issues not suitable for determination as preliminary points of law.
* Procedural requirement – no obligation to cite a specific statute for a preliminary objection, but the objection must still be a pure point of law.
|
28 March 2006 |
| February 2006 |
|
|
|
15 February 2006 |
|
A continuing breach under section 7 restarts limitation, so the contractual claim was not time-barred.
Limitation law – Law of Limitation Act 1971 – section 7 (continuing breach) – accrual of cause of action – section 4 and 5 applicability after repudiation – contractual claims and tolling by negotiations/promises.
|
13 February 2006 |
|
Defective verification is curable; absence of board-authorisation is not resolvable by preliminary objection.
Civil procedure – Pleadings – Verification of plaint – omnibus verification defective for failure to distinguish paragraphs true to knowledge or belief, lack of date/place and signatory titles – Order VI r.15; Curable defects – court’s duty to do substantive justice allows amendment; Preliminary objections – scope per Mukisa Biscuits test – matter requiring evidence (board resolution) not suitable as preliminary objection; Cause of action – sufficiency of plaint and annexures to show cause of action.
|
9 February 2006 |
|
Appointment of a receiver after the defence deadline does not allow late extension; suit proceeds ex parte against that defendant.
Civil procedure – Default – Effect of appointment of receiver/manager after expiry of time to file defence – O. VIII r.2 Civil Procedure Code (as amended by GN 422/94) – Receiver not a party unless joined – No power to extend time where period has lapsed.
|
3 February 2006 |
| January 2006 |
|
|
|
4 January 2006 |