wilson christopher tarimo another vs tib development bank 2 others 2023 tzhclandd 17182 24 november 2023

wilson christopher tarimo another vs tib development bank 2 others 2023 tzhclandd 17182 24 november 2023

Applicants established existence of arguable issue but failed to prove irreparable loss and balance of convenience; losses claimed are monetary and can be compensated by damages; balance of convenience favors respondents as bank stands to suffer more; application dismissed for failure to meet all conditions for injunction.

Citation
wilson christopher tarimo another vs tib development bank 2 others 2023 tzhclandd 17182 24 november 2023
Parties
1st Applicant: Wilson Christopher Tarimo; 2nd Applicant: Waziri Christopher Tarimo; 3rd Applicant: Kibo Natural Water Limited; 1st Respondent: TIB Development Bank; 2nd Respondent: Attorney General; 3rd Respondent: Mbuzax Auction Mart and Company Ltd
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
24 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Mareva Injunction
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Mareva Injunction, Temporary Injunction, Breach of Contract, Territorial Jurisdiction, Credit Facility Agreement
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Banking Law Mareva Injunction Temporary Injunction Breach of Contract Territorial Jurisdiction Credit Facility Agreement

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wilson Christopher Tarimo

1st Applicant

Waziri Christopher Tarimo

2nd Applicant

Kibo Natural Water Limited

3rd Applicant

TIB Development Bank

1st Respondent

Attorney General

2nd Respondent

Mbuzax Auction Mart and Company Ltd

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Land Application / Ruling on Application for Mareva Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants are entitled to Mareva injunction pending intended suit
  2. 2 Whether applicants have met the three conditions for temporary injunction
  3. 3 Whether the court has territorial jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants established existence of arguable issue but failed to prove irreparable loss and balance of convenience; losses claimed are monetary and can be compensated by damages; balance of convenience favors respondents as bank stands to suffer more; application dismissed for failure to meet all conditions for injunction.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Application for Mareva injunction dismissed
  • Applicants to pay costs