first national bank tanzania limites vs josic company limited and 2 others 2020 tzhccomd 2092 6 november 2020

first national bank tanzania limites vs josic company limited and 2 others 2020 tzhccomd 2092 6 november 2020

The 1st defendant breached the overdraft agreement by failing to repay the facility within the agreed period, and the 2nd and 3rd defendants breached their guarantee obligations by failing to pay upon demand. The alleged condition that repayment depended on Vodacom payments was not part of the written agreement. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
first national bank tanzania limites vs josic company limited and 2 others 2020 tzhccomd 2092 6 november 2020
Parties
Plaintiff: First National Bank Tanzania Limited; 1st Defendant: Josic Company Limited; 2nd Defendant: Joseph Edgar Chiwalo; 3rd Defendant: Maria Shija Mabula
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
6 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for the plaintiff against all defendants jointly and severally
Legal Topics
Overdraft Facility, Loan Default, Personal Guarantee, Breach of Contract, Interest on Judgment Debt
Source Language
english
Banking Law Contract Law Commercial Law Overdraft Facility Loan Default Personal Guarantee Breach of Contract Interest on Judgment Debt

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

First National Bank Tanzania Limited

Plaintiff

Josic Company Limited

1st Defendant

Joseph Edgar Chiwalo

2nd Defendant

Maria Shija Mabula

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 To what reliefs are the parties entitled

Ratio Decidendi

The 1st defendant breached the overdraft agreement by failing to repay the facility within the agreed period, and the 2nd and 3rd defendants breached their guarantee obligations by failing to pay upon demand. The alleged condition that repayment depended on Vodacom payments was not part of the written agreement. The plaintiff is entitled to the outstanding sum, interest, and costs.

Court Disposition

judgment for the plaintiff against all defendants jointly and severally

Orders

  • Defendants to pay plaintiff Tshs. 371,421,395.68
  • Defendants to pay interest at 22% per annum on the decretal sum from January 2019 to the date of judgment