shaizad azad bhanji vs raju mwambungu 161 others group 7 ptycorporate security service 2022 tzhcld 952 23 september 2022

shaizad azad bhanji vs raju mwambungu 161 others group 7 ptycorporate security service 2022 tzhcld 952 23 september 2022

Applicant was director of both 2nd and 3rd respondents as evidenced by BRELA forms, special resolutions, and prior rulings; therefore, he is liable for arrest and detention as civil prisoner in execution of the decree.

Citation
shaizad azad bhanji vs raju mwambungu 161 others group 7 ptycorporate security service 2022 tzhcld 952 23 september 2022
Parties
Applicant: Shaizad Azad Bhanji; 1st Respondent: Raju Mwambungu & 161 Others; 2nd Respondent: Group 7 PTY; 3rd Respondent: Corporate Security Service
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
23 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Revision Application / Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Director Liability, Execution of Decree, Corporate Veil, Enforcement of Arbitral Award
Source Language
English
Labour Law Company Law Civil Procedure Director Liability Execution of Decree Corporate Veil Enforcement of Arbitral Award

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shaizad Azad Bhanji

Applicant

Raju Mwambungu & 161 Others

1st Respondent

Group 7 PTY

2nd Respondent

Corporate Security Service

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Revision Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant is director of the 2nd and 3rd respondents
  2. 2 Liability for arrest and detention as civil prisoner in execution of decree

Ratio Decidendi

Applicant was director of both 2nd and 3rd respondents as evidenced by BRELA forms, special resolutions, and prior rulings; therefore, he is liable for arrest and detention as civil prisoner in execution of the decree.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Applicant to be summoned to show cause why he should not be detained as civil prisoner until full payment of decree sum