abdallah salimu maganga vs board of trustees of the agricultural inputs trust fund another 2014 tzhc 2289 5 november 2014

abdallah salimu maganga vs board of trustees of the agricultural inputs trust fund another 2014 tzhc 2289 5 november 2014

There was no contract between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant, only a loan application. The plaintiff failed to fulfill the conditions precedent for the loan, particularly the provision of security. Therefore, there was no breach of contract by either defendant and the plaintiff is not entitled to any relief.

Citation
abdallah salimu maganga vs board of trustees of the agricultural inputs trust fund another 2014 tzhc 2289 5 november 2014
Parties
Plaintiff: Abdallah Salimu Maganga; 1st Defendant: The Board of Trustees of the Agricultural Inputs Trust Fund; 2nd Defendant: International Commercial Bank (Tanzania) Limited
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
5 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
suit dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Specific Performance, Loan Agreements, Conditions Precedent
Source Language
English
Contract Law Breach of Contract Specific Performance Loan Agreements Conditions Precedent

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abdallah Salimu Maganga

Plaintiff

The Board of Trustees of the Agricultural Inputs Trust Fund

1st Defendant

International Commercial Bank (Tanzania) Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a loan agreement between the plaintiff and 1st defendant
  2. 2 Whether the 2nd defendant was bound by any agreement between plaintiff and 1st defendant
  3. 3 Whether the 2nd defendant had mandate to approve the loan

Ratio Decidendi

There was no contract between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant, only a loan application. The plaintiff failed to fulfill the conditions precedent for the loan, particularly the provision of security. Therefore, there was no breach of contract by either defendant and the plaintiff is not entitled to any relief.

Court Disposition

suit dismissed

Orders

  • Each party to bear its own costs