evarist john kawishe vs crdb bank ltd 2019 tzca 631 8 march 2019

evarist john kawishe vs crdb bank ltd 2019 tzca 631 8 march 2019

The letter of lien executed by the appellant constituted a continuing guarantee, authorizing the respondent to utilize the Fixed Deposit Account to satisfy the principal debtor's obligations for both the initial and subsequent loans. The appellant did not revoke the guarantee, and the liability was co-extensive with...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
evarist john kawishe vs crdb bank ltd 2019 tzca 631 8 march 2019
Parties
Appellant: Evarist John Kawishe; Respondent: CRDB Bank Ltd
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
8 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Guarantee, Letter of Lien, Co Extensive Liability, Continuing Guarantee, Banking Practice
Source Language
english
Banking Law Contract Law Guarantee Letter of Lien Co Extensive Liability Continuing Guarantee Banking Practice

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Evarist John Kawishe

Appellant

CRDB Bank Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's liability as guarantor under the letter of lien was discharged after one year or continued for subsequent loans to the principal debtor.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was entitled to uplift the appellant's Fixed Deposit Account to satisfy the principal debtor's outstanding loans.
  3. 3 Whether the guarantee was co-extensive and continuing in nature under the law and the terms of the letter of lien.

Ratio Decidendi

The letter of lien executed by the appellant constituted a continuing guarantee, authorizing the respondent to utilize the Fixed Deposit Account to satisfy the principal debtor's obligations for both the initial and subsequent loans. The appellant did not revoke the guarantee, and the liability was co-extensive with that of the principal debtor. The respondent acted within its rights under the letter of lien and the law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed in its entirety with costs.