NA

'' IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA · AT DAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 88 OF 2004 • In the _Matter of an Intended Appeal ' BETWEEN NATIONAL SHIPPING AGENCIES CO. LTD. (As duly constituted Attorney of M/S GLOBAL CONTAINER LINES LIMITED) ............................ APPLICANT VERSUS TANZANIA HARBOURS AUTHORITY ............................. RESPONDENT (Appeal from the decision of the High Court of Tanzania at Dar es Salaam) (Bubeshi, J.) dated the 6 th day of July, 2004 in Civil Case No. 134 of 1996 RULING MROSO, J.A.: In Civil Application No. 88 of 2004 National Shipping Agencies Co. Ltd., as the duly constituted Attorney of M/S Global Container Lines Limited, applied for stay of execution of a decree of the High Court in Civil Case No. 134 of 1996, under Rule 9 (2) (b) of the Court Rules, 1979. A single judge of the Court, Munuo, J.A., struck out the application upon a preliminary objection which was raised by the Respondent, The Tanzania Harbours Authority. It is apparent that the application was struck out because a notice of appeal against the 2 High Court decision ·and the application itself were found to be defective. The judge had found as a fact that the party appearing as the applicant was no longer acting for its principal, Global Container Lines Ltd., since 15th July, 2004, which date preceded the date of the filing of the application on 19th day of July, 2004. The ruling by the learned judge said in part as follows:- Since NASACO (National Shipping Agencies Co. Ltd.) ceased being Attorneys of Global Container Lines Ltd. with effect from the 15th July, 2004, the Notice of Appeal and the present application had to be rectified by way of amendment in view of the fact that NASACO was no longer a party to the proceedings. As it is, neither the application ·nor·tbe -notice of appea-1 are··properly .before: the Court. Hence th·e application is incompetent ... In the result the application is struck out with costs. After the application for stay of execution was struck out the applicant in Civil Application No. 88 of 2004 filed in that same 3 application a notice of application for substitution and amendment of the name of the Applicant. It was intended to substitute the name M/S Global Container lines Limited for National Shipping Agencies Co. Ltd. The notice is shown to have been given under Rules 3 (2) (a), 45 (3) (a) and 104 of the Court Rules, 1979. The orders to be sought in an informal application were the following, and I quote them verbatim:- (a) The name of NATIONAL SHIPPING AGENCIES LTD. who have hitherto been suing on behalf of their principals, M/S GLOBAL CONTAINER LINES LIMITED, be struck out from the proceedings and in their place, the Principal, M/S GLOBAL CONTAINER LINES LIMITED be granted leave to continue with the proceedings in their own name; (b) The Notice of Appeal and all the other documents filed in the proceedings before the Court of Appeal and the High Court be amended to reflect the removal of the National Shipping