meeco unisys ltd vs electric supply co ltd another 2005 tzhccomd 22 22 march 2005

meeco unisys ltd vs electric supply co ltd another 2005 tzhccomd 22 22 march 2005

The Plaintiff did not deliver the goods by the agreed date, but the contract only allowed for liquidated damages for such delay, not immediate termination. The 1st Defendant wrongfully terminated the contract and forfeited the performance bond under the wrong clause. The Plaintiff is entitled to specific damages, but not general damages or interest at the commercial rate. The 1st Defendant is entitled to liquidated damages for the period of delay, to be deducted from the Plaintiff's award.

Citation
meeco unisys ltd vs electric supply co ltd another 2005 tzhccomd 22 22 march 2005
Parties
Plaintiff: Meeco Unisys Limited; 1st Defendant: Tanzania Electric Supply Company Limited; 2nd Defendant: Parastatal Sector Reform Commission
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
22 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the Plaintiff in part
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Liquidated Damages, Performance Bond, Contract Termination, Specific Damages
Source Language
English
Contract Law Commercial Law Breach of Contract Liquidated Damages Performance Bond Contract Termination Specific Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Meeco Unisys Limited

Plaintiff

Tanzania Electric Supply Company Limited

1st Defendant

Parastatal Sector Reform Commission

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant's termination of the contract was unlawful and unjustified
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff suffered specific damages as claimed
  3. 3 Whether forfeiture of the performance bond and imposition of liquidated damages were lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff did not deliver the goods by the agreed date, but the contract only allowed for liquidated damages for such delay, not immediate termination. The 1st Defendant wrongfully terminated the contract and forfeited the performance bond under the wrong clause. The Plaintiff is entitled to specific damages, but not general damages or interest at the commercial rate. The 1st Defendant is entitled to liquidated damages for the period of delay, to be deducted from the Plaintiff's award.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the Plaintiff in part

Orders

  • Declaration that the termination of the contract was unlawful
  • Defendants to pay Plaintiff USD 23,230 (performance bond)