emperor treasure company vs serengeti district council and another 2024 tzhc 801 14 march 2024
The suit is time-barred as it was instituted after the six-year limitation period from the date of accrual of the cause of action, and the issue of continuing breach was not pleaded in the plaint. Statutory limitation cannot be overridden by contractual clauses.
- Citation
- emperor treasure company vs serengeti district council and another 2024 tzhc 801 14 march 2024
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Emperor Treasure Company; 1st Defendant: Serengeti District Council; 2nd Defendant: The Attorney General
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 14 March 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- suit dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Limitation of Actions, Breach of Contract, Preliminary Objections, Pleadings
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Emperor Treasure Company
Plaintiff
Serengeti District Council
1st Defendant
The Attorney General
2nd Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit is time-barred under the Law of Limitation Act, Cap. 89 R.E 2019
- 2 Whether the preliminary objection is a pure point of law
Ratio Decidendi
The suit is time-barred as it was instituted after the six-year limitation period from the date of accrual of the cause of action, and the issue of continuing breach was not pleaded in the plaint. Statutory limitation cannot be overridden by contractual clauses.
Court Disposition
suit dismissed
Orders
- Suit dismissed for being time-barred under section 3(1) of the Law of Limitation Act, Cap. 89 R.E 2019
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment