ecica trading limited others vs diamond trust bank tanzania limited 2015 tzhccomd 2101 24 july 2015

ecica trading limited others vs diamond trust bank tanzania limited 2015 tzhccomd 2101 24 july 2015

The consolidated applications are incompetent and struck out with costs for omitting to cite sub rule (1)(c) to Rule 3 of Order XXXV and for wrong citation of the provisions of the law.

Citation
ecica trading limited others vs diamond trust bank tanzania limited 2015 tzhccomd 2101 24 july 2015
Parties
Applicant/defendant: ECICA Trading Limited; Applicant/defendant: Elias Ulisaja Mwanjala; Applicant/defendant: Eva Elias Mwanjala; Applicant/defendant: Grace John; Respondent/plaintiff: Diamond Trust Bank Tanzania Limited
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Miscellaneous Commercial Causes / Ruling on Preliminary Objections to Applications for Leave to Defend
Outcome
Applications struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Citation of Legal Provisions, Leave to Defend, Procedural Defects, Mortgage Enforcement
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Banking Law Citation of Legal Provisions Leave to Defend Procedural Defects Mortgage Enforcement

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ECICA Trading Limited

Applicant/defendant

Elias Ulisaja Mwanjala

Applicant/defendant

Eva Elias Mwanjala

Applicant/defendant

Grace John

Applicant/defendant

Diamond Trust Bank Tanzania Limited

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Consolidated Miscellaneous Commercial Causes / Ruling on Preliminary Objections to Applications for Leave to Defend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to cite the correct provision of law renders an application incompetent
  2. 2 Whether the applications for leave to defend should be struck out for procedural defects

Ratio Decidendi

The consolidated applications are incompetent and struck out with costs for omitting to cite sub rule (1)(c) to Rule 3 of Order XXXV and for wrong citation of the provisions of the law.

Court Disposition

Applications struck out with costs

Orders

  • Misc. Commercial Application No. 58 of 2015 and No. 94 of 2015 are struck out with costs for procedural defects