20020731 TZHC Mbeya

20020731 TZHC Mbeya

The appellant was liable to refund the balance of the advanced sum as per the unequivocal terms of the agency agreement and the repayment agreement. Overheads were to be met from commission, not the advanced sum. The appellant failed to render proper accounts or prove lawful expenditure in excess of the advance. The respondent was not required to foreclose on the security before suing. Allegations of coercion were unsupported by evidence.

Citation
20020731 TZHC Mbeya
Parties
Appellant: CASMIR B. KESSY; Respondent: TAYLOR WINCH (T) LTD.
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
31 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Agency Relationship, Indemnity, Repayment Agreement, Commission, Security for Debt
Source Language
English
Contract Law Agency Law Agency Relationship Indemnity Repayment Agreement Commission Security for Debt

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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CASMIR B. KESSY

Appellant

TAYLOR WINCH (T) LTD.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was liable to refund the balance of money advanced under the agency agreement
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to deduct overheads from the advanced sum
  3. 3 Whether the respondent was required to foreclose on the security before suing

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was liable to refund the balance of the advanced sum as per the unequivocal terms of the agency agreement and the repayment agreement. Overheads were to be met from commission, not the advanced sum. The appellant failed to render proper accounts or prove lawful expenditure in excess of the advance. The respondent was not required to foreclose on the security before suing. Allegations of coercion were unsupported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appellant to pay the respondent T.Shs.8,205,407/=
  • Appellant to pay costs of the appeal