20010817 TZHC Dar es Salaam
The court found the bill of costs to be fair, reasonable, and within the prescribed scale, adopting the decree holder's arguments and sustaining the claimed amounts, particularly the instruction fees.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 20010817 TZHC Dar es Salaam
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Gapco Tanzania Limited; Defendant: Southern Paper Mills Company Limited
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 17 August 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Case / Ruling on Bill of Costs
- Outcome
- Bill of costs allowed as presented in favour of the decree holder.
- Legal Topics
- Taxation of Costs, Bill of Costs, Ex Parte Proceedings
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gapco Tanzania Limited
Plaintiff
Southern Paper Mills Company Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Bill of Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the bill of costs as presented by the decree holder is fair and reasonable
- 2 Whether the instruction fees and other items claimed are justified
Ratio Decidendi
The court found the bill of costs to be fair, reasonable, and within the prescribed scale, adopting the decree holder's arguments and sustaining the claimed amounts, particularly the instruction fees.
Court Disposition
Bill of costs allowed as presented in favour of the decree holder.
Orders
- Bill of costs taxed and allowed at TZS 12,172,943.60 in favour of the decree holder.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH: COUR'.1' OF TANZANIZ DAR ES. SALAAM DISTRICT REGISTRY AT DAR ES ,. SALAAM. ·,, . CI VIL CASE NO. 222 ·01/'1996 G-Jil?CO TANZAi'HA LIMITED ~: ~ PLAINTIFF V.C.'1SUS SOUTHEPJ'J P ~ ER MILLS Cc.MP.ANY LIMITED DEFENDANT M,UTUNGI , ... .D11 t The present Ruling re'fers to the bill of coast preferred by the decree holder M/S- Gapco {TZ) Limited against M/S 8 outhern Paper r;iJ.ills Limited. ·J.'he subsequent t~ati.cn proceeded expart 0stens-ibly Subject to the order of the taxing master issued os the 17/Nov/2000. Upon- ·.•., defalllt in appear,a11.ce· .of the ~ge,·.1ci~t debtor, ride notice of · ', appearance dated. 22/S~temb~t1'" 200{) compelting him to show appearanc~· . ··1 {!- on. the 6/10/2000, subsequant · by the matter was reshedeld· for the '· ./ 20/10/2000 a de~E: on which the gaxing master granted exparte order on the 17/4/2.000 the court .farther granted the matter to proced by was of matter submision it was when the matter was awaiting the · submission that the record got musplead but has now been fefreved and broght to my at~ent;\.o.n !9:r thq rluling. I may new wish to dewell upon the submitted fu.bmission wh.ich cater for all 24 items covered in the bill of cost,:fotalling to a sum of 12,ll72,943/6o. r • ~ ···~ - l've carrefull'o/~orle ·tHrough the submission, i~,J.:da:fally ,., I fund no reason. , to fault •the- adopted argument supportive ·. of l, the. indieat~ . cost for each item I whi3h cover:; instructions to take,legal action pegged at 10,261,387/90 ' ' . ~9µld ...,• ha-Ve raised concern, - but" going by the argument in support ~theref l' ve ~10. reas_on to differ wi i;h tbe desree ·. holders line of argun\~r{i I resp9it,ifully adopt the s·~me .and proced to sustain the pegger amotmt 'of•??,261,,~87/93 ~$ instruction fees. Be as: it .. r.iay 'bl I __find tne pr-'?J~pted· bill o~i!-:<;o~'t. to be 'iying with, ·_ the perviews of the -prosaibed SA~e~ anq. is ·to m"y. coniictered fin~H~- f ai!'." and ros:Sona'ule., 'I ther~i_;fe' t~ the bill· of ·cost as presented. in fa~x- of the clearee ~old~-\.tii'.t.,ri~~ :@f T~ll,s. 1a,if.7.;?,943/Go.'., _1·~{ ... ''.- -· •. J I 2 I Court: Ruling morked read in the absence of parties though notice was availed last admit (Friday 10th) that all Ruling shell be read but today. Each ;::iarty is eattled to a copy for the hegistry Upon meeting tt.ie requinte see. F.SoK. Mutungi REGIST?...AR 17/8/2001 /JS