robert thomson construction equipment another vs mark foley 2005 tzhccomd 48 29 july 2005

robert thomson construction equipment another vs mark foley 2005 tzhccomd 48 29 july 2005

The plaintiff does not have a valid residence permit and does not own immovable property in Tanzania. The conditions for ordering security for costs are met. However, the amount requested was not substantiated, so the court exercises discretion to order a lower amount.

Citation
robert thomson construction equipment another vs mark foley 2005 tzhccomd 48 29 july 2005
Parties
1st Applicant/1st Defendant: Robert Thomson; 2nd Applicant/2nd Defendant: Construction Equipment Africa Limited; Respondent: Mark Foley
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
29 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Security for Costs in Commercial Case / Ruling on Application
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Declaratory Relief, Jurisdiction of Foreign Plaintiffs
Source Language
English

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Thomson

1st Applicant/1st Defendant

Construction Equipment Africa Limited

2nd Applicant/2nd Defendant

Mark Foley

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Security for Costs in Commercial Case / Ruling on Application

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff should be ordered to provide security for costs under Order XXV Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1966

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff does not have a valid residence permit and does not own immovable property in Tanzania. The conditions for ordering security for costs are met. However, the amount requested was not substantiated, so the court exercises discretion to order a lower amount.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Plaintiff to deposit Tshs 15,000,000/= as security for costs by 30/08/2005.
  • If defaulted, the suit will be dismissed.