stanbic bank t ltd vs nam enterprises ltd others 2018 tzhccomd 31 5 february 2018

stanbic bank t ltd vs nam enterprises ltd others 2018 tzhccomd 31 5 february 2018

The court found that the plaintiff proved, on a balance of probability, that loans and overdraft facilities were granted to the 1st defendant, secured by guarantees from the 2nd to 5th defendants. The defendants breached the repayment terms and guarantees, and failed to provide credible evidence of full repayment. The outstanding loan amount as of suit filing was USD 2,479,000.58, and the defendants are jointly and severally liable for this sum, interest, and costs.

Citation
stanbic bank t ltd vs nam enterprises ltd others 2018 tzhccomd 31 5 february 2018
Parties
Plaintiff: Stanbic Bank (T) Ltd; 1st Defendant: NAM Enterprises Ltd; 2nd Defendant: Alex Stephen Lukumay; 3rd Defendant: Elias Stephen Lukumay; 4th Defendant: Namnyaki Stephen Lukumay; 5th Defendant: Stephen Korduni Lukumay
Court
TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
5 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Loan Agreements, Guarantees, Breach of Contract, Repayment Obligations, Interest on Loans, Mortgage and Debenture Rights
Source Language
English
Banking Law Contract Law Commercial Law Loan Agreements Guarantees Breach of Contract Repayment Obligations Interest on Loans +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stanbic Bank (T) Ltd

Plaintiff

NAM Enterprises Ltd

1st Defendant

Alex Stephen Lukumay

2nd Defendant

Elias Stephen Lukumay

3rd Defendant

Namnyaki Stephen Lukumay

4th Defendant

Stephen Korduni Lukumay

5th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether loan facilities were granted to the 1st defendant and their terms
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of the loan facility terms by either party
  3. 3 Whether the loan facilities have been repaid in full

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the plaintiff proved, on a balance of probability, that loans and overdraft facilities were granted to the 1st defendant, secured by guarantees from the 2nd to 5th defendants. The defendants breached the repayment terms and guarantees, and failed to provide credible evidence of full repayment. The outstanding loan amount as of suit filing was USD 2,479,000.58, and the defendants are jointly and severally liable for this sum, interest, and costs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff.

Orders

  • Defendants jointly and severally to pay plaintiff USD 2,479,000.58.
  • Defendants to pay interest at 11% per annum on the claim amount from the date of suit to judgment.