High Court Commercial Division

The Commercial Court was officially inaugurated on 15th September, 1999. The Government of Tanzania endorsed the recommendations in 1997. It is a division of the High Court of Tanzania. The difference with other High Court Registries is that this court specializes in the determination of commercial disputes only.

13 judgments
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
13 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
December 2014
Reported
A company-registry 'caveat' by letter has no statutory force; courts should not order changes affecting non-parties.
Companies law – caveat at Companies Registry – no statutory recognition of caveat under Companies Act; informal letters lodged at BRELA have no legal force – Registrar entitled to withhold amendments while related shareholder disputes pending – courts should not make orders affecting non-parties (company not before court).
19 December 2014
October 2014
Failure to file witness statements within the seven-day rule was held to be non‑compliance justifying expungement and dismissal.
Civil procedure — Rule 49(1) & (2) GN No. 250 of 2012 — Witness statements as evidence-in-chief — Filing within seven days of completion of mediation — Failure to comply amounts to failure to prosecute — Late-filed statements without leave irregular and expunged — Counterclaim may proceed ex parte.
9 October 2014
September 2014
Defendant held over after lease expiry without valid renewal notice; liable for eviction and mesne profits (USD64,000/month less USD150,000).
* Landlord–tenant law – lease expiry and holding over – whether a three‑months' notice to renew was valid under clause 4(c). * Contract interpretation – what constitutes notice and agreement to renew; duty to prepare addendum. * Mesne profits – award of mesne profits for unauthorized occupation and calculation (monthly rate agreed less payments). * Expert referral clause – when referral to nominated assessor is unnecessary where parties have agreed rent. * Remedies – vacant possession, damages/mesne profits, costs; discretionary refusal of immediate distress or broker appointment due to operational considerations.
9 September 2014
Applicant failed to show good and sufficient cause under section 14(1) to extend time to seek setting aside of default judgment.
* Extension of time – Section 14(1) Law of Limitation Act – requirement to show good and sufficient cause; * Adequacy of affidavit – need for evidential explanation for delay; * Negligence of counsel – not ordinarily good cause for extension; * Mis‑citation of procedural rule – not fatal where correct statutory provision cited.
4 September 2014
August 2014
A disputed sworn allegation of payment constituted a bona fide triable issue, so unconditional leave to defend a summary suit was granted.
• Civil procedure – Summary suit – Order XXXV, Rule 3(1) CPC – Leave to appear and defend – Requirement of at least one bona fide triable issue. • Evidence – Interlocutory stage – Disputed factual allegation sworn in affidavit may constitute triable issue without producing best evidence.
29 August 2014
Reported
Financier’s payment discharged buyer’s debt; seller must repay USD 35,600 mistakenly received as VAT.
Commercial law – Sale of motor vehicle on credit; evidence of financier’s payment extinguishing buyer’s indebtedness; VAT on imported capital goods – tax exemption and mistaken VAT invoice; restitution of mistakenly paid VAT; refusal to award unsupported commercial interest.
29 August 2014
Reported
Agreement rescinded for defendants' breach; refund with interest awarded; fraud not established.
Contract law – share acquisition – payment instalments and default; remedy provided by contract (clause 4.0) versus wrongful repossession of management; rescission as remedy for breach; fraud — active concealment and intent required; interest and costs on rescission award.
22 August 2014
July 2014
Parties' replacement of an arbitration clause with an undertaking vesting court jurisdiction permitted default judgment against the defendant.
* Civil procedure – Arbitration clause displaced by subsequent undertaking – Section 6 Arbitration Act not triggered where parties confer non‑exclusive court jurisdiction. * Civil procedure – Default judgment – Rule 22(1) High Court (Commercial Division) Procedure Rules – absence of written statement of defence; proof of service required. * Procedure – Applications must cite enabling provisions; non‑citation renders application incompetent. * Extension of time – must account for each day of delay; negligence or inaction by counsel not sufficient.
31 July 2014
May 2014
Borrower defaulted on loans; bank breached fiduciary duty by unexplained deductions from authorised SWIFT transfers.
Commercial law – loan facilities – breach for non-payment; Banking law – banker–customer fiduciary duties in executing SWIFT/TT transfers – requirement to implement instructions and communicate deductions/exchange effects; Evidence – need for pleading and proof of oral promises/mandates; Remedies – set-off of unjustified bank deductions against decretal sum, interest and costs.
31 May 2014
Reported
Leave to appeal refused because the challenged joinder rulings were interlocutory and not appealable.
Interlocutory orders — non-appealable; Leave to appeal — High Court must assess existence of right of appeal before granting leave; Joinder of parties — Order 1 r.1 and r.10(2) (necessary/proper parties); Res judicata/functus officio considered but decisive issue was interlocutory nature of rulings; Procedural competence of chamber summons and affidavit objections noted.
8 May 2014
March 2014
Reported
A preliminary objection that a commercial suit is a land matter failed because the land-versus-commercial classification requires trial evidence.
* Jurisdiction — Commercial Division — Whether commercial jurisdiction is ousted by land-related elements; overlap between commercial contracts and land matters. * Civil procedure — Preliminary objection — Requirement that objection raise a pure point of law to be disposed of without evidence. * Wildlife conservation vs. town planning — Determination of whether a Wildlife Management Area falls within district planning jurisdiction requires evidence at trial. * Interim relief — Commercial activities conducted in a Wildlife Management Area may attract Commercial Division jurisdiction where commercial character is present.
13 March 2014
Preliminary objection that the dispute is a land matter was dismissed; jurisdictional and factual issues require trial determination.
* Jurisdiction – Commercial Division – Whether dispute over activities in a wildlife management area is a land matter or a commercial matter – mixed questions of fact and law require trial. * Civil procedure – preliminary objection – objection not a pure point of law and cannot be decided without evidence. * Wildlife law/town planning – relationship between Wildlife Management Areas and district town-planning jurisdiction.
13 March 2014
Plaintiff must correct a glaring discrepancy in the defendant/administrator’s name before judgment on admission can be considered.
Civil procedure — Party names — Misnomer/misallegation of defendant’s name — Requirement to correctly identify defendant (administrator) on record before judgment on admission — Effect of name discrepancy on proceedings.
12 March 2014