rajani industries ltd vs parastatal sector reform commission another 2006 tzhc 297 5 may 2006

rajani industries ltd vs parastatal sector reform commission another 2006 tzhc 297 5 may 2006

The suit is time barred as the cause of action for breach of contract accrued in January 1994 and for breach of statutory duty on 26/10/1996. The plaintiff cannot rely on exclusion or discovery provisions as there were no pleadings of continuous breach, fraud, or mistake, and the prior suit was not dismissed for lack of substantive jurisdiction.

Citation
rajani industries ltd vs parastatal sector reform commission another 2006 tzhc 297 5 may 2006
Parties
Plaintiff: Rajani Industries Ltd; First Defendant: The Parastatal Sector Reform Commission; Second Defendant: Tanzania Liquid Storage Co. Ltd
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
5 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objections
Outcome
Suit struck out with costs
Legal Topics
Limitation of Actions, Breach of Contract, Preliminary Objection, Statutory Duty
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Statutory Limitation Limitation of Actions Breach of Contract Preliminary Objection Statutory Duty

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rajani Industries Ltd

Plaintiff

The Parastatal Sector Reform Commission

First Defendant

Tanzania Liquid Storage Co. Ltd

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Case / Ruling on Preliminary Objections

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the suit is barred by the law of limitation
  2. 2 Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action against the second defendant
  3. 3 Whether the suit is bad for misjoinder of causes of action

Ratio Decidendi

The suit is time barred as the cause of action for breach of contract accrued in January 1994 and for breach of statutory duty on 26/10/1996. The plaintiff cannot rely on exclusion or discovery provisions as there were no pleadings of continuous breach, fraud, or mistake, and the prior suit was not dismissed for lack of substantive jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Suit struck out with costs

Orders

  • Suit is struck out with costs to the defendants