oceanic beverages ltd vs basil saprapasen others 2016 tzhc 2037 15 august 2016

oceanic beverages ltd vs basil saprapasen others 2016 tzhc 2037 15 august 2016

The Plaintiff failed to prove lawful termination of the 1st Defendant as CEO or lawful forfeiture of his shares, as there was no evidence of compliance with the Articles of Association. The Plaintiff also failed to prove breach of contract or failure to account for money had and received, as the investigation report relied upon lacked evidential value and the Defendants were not given an opportunity to respond. The burden of proof was not discharged by the Plaintiff.

Citation
oceanic beverages ltd vs basil saprapasen others 2016 tzhc 2037 15 august 2016
Parties
Plaintiff: Oceanic Beverages Limited; 1st Defendant: Basil Saprapasen; 2nd Defendant: Melvin Saprapasen; 3rd Defendant: Brian Fernandez
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
15 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Suit dismissed except for declaration on CEO status; costs to Defendants
Legal Topics
Breach of Employment Contract, Money Had and Received, Share Forfeiture, Corporate Governance
Source Language
English
Employment Law Company Law Contract Law Breach of Employment Contract Money Had and Received Share Forfeiture Corporate Governance

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oceanic Beverages Limited

Plaintiff

Basil Saprapasen

1st Defendant

Melvin Saprapasen

2nd Defendant

Brian Fernandez

3rd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1st Defendant was lawfully terminated as CEO and/or remains a shareholder of the Plaintiff Company
  2. 2 Whether the 1st Defendant breached the terms of the service contract
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants failed to account for money had and received

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to prove lawful termination of the 1st Defendant as CEO or lawful forfeiture of his shares, as there was no evidence of compliance with the Articles of Association. The Plaintiff also failed to prove breach of contract or failure to account for money had and received, as the investigation report relied upon lacked evidential value and the Defendants were not given an opportunity to respond. The burden of proof was not discharged by the Plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Suit dismissed except for declaration on CEO status; costs to Defendants

Orders

  • It is declared that the 1st Defendant is no longer CEO of the Plaintiff Company but remains a shareholder.
  • The suit is otherwise dismissed.