Download PDF

Tanzania Judgment

TANZLII

image6645

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The defendant was duly served but failed to file any defence or application for leave to defend; therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment for the claimed amount and costs as per the cited legal provisions.

Court disposition

summary judgment for the plaintiffs

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to pay the 2nd plaintiff Tshs.33,185,000/= being un-remitted members' contributions plus accumulated penalties.
  • The defendant is to bear the costs of the suit.

02

Material facts

Parties

The Office of Attorney General

Plaintiff Counsel: Elfrida Rutashobya and Baraka Mgaya

The Board of Trustees of the National Social Security Fund

Plaintiff Counsel: Elfrida Rutashobya and Baraka Mgaya

Twiyawe Company Limited T/A Vamos Hotel

Defendant

Amounts and remedies

  • Un Remitted Contributions and Penalties: TZS 33,185,000
  • Principal Contribution: TZS 16,160,000
  • Penalties: TZS 17,025,000

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Summary Suit / Summary Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The plaintiffs argued that the defendant, as a registered employer, failed to remit mandatory social security contributions and accumulated penalties, despite legal obligations and service of process, justifying summary judgment under Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code and section 74A(2) of the Social Security Funds Act.
Respondent
The defendant did not file any application for leave to defend or any written statement of defence.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code [Cap 33 R.E.2019]

    Summary judgment may be entered where the defendant fails to apply for leave to defend or file a defence after proper service.

  2. 02

    Section 74A(2) of the Social Security Funds Act [Cap 50 R.E.2018]

    Employers are legally obligated to remit both their own and employees' contributions to the social security fund, with penalties for default.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The defendant was duly served but failed to file any defence or application for leave to defend; therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment for the claimed amount and costs as per the cited legal provisions.

Obiter and limits

  • The defendant's failure to remit contributions denies employees their rightful pension benefits after retirement.

Court disposition

summary judgment for the plaintiffs

  • The defendant is ordered to pay the 2nd plaintiff Tshs.33,185,000/= being un-remitted members' contributions plus accumulated penalties.
  • The defendant is to bear the costs of the suit.

Source and reliance status

TANZLII · 1 January 2025

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

TANZLII

Judgment· 1 January 2025

image6645

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (MOROGORO SUB REGISTRY)

AT MOROGORO CIVIL CASE NO. 15454 OF 2024

THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL PLAINTIFF

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY FUND 2'^'^ PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

TWIYAWE COMPANY LIMITED T/A VAMOS HOTEL DEFENDANT Date of Last order: 06/02/2025 Date of Judgement:07/02/2025

SUMMARY JUDGEMENT MAGOIGA.J. This is a summary judgement. The piaintiffs/ THE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL and THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE NATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY FUND under summary procedure vide Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code [Cap 33 R.E.2019] ready together with section 74A (2) of the Sociai Security Funds Act,[Cap 50 R.E.2018] by a plaint instituted the instant suit against the defendant praying for judgement and decree in the following orders: - , 1 a) The defendant to be ordered to pay the sum of Tshs.33,185,000/= (say Tanzania Shillings Thirty-Three Million One Hundred Eighty- Five Thousand Only) being un-remitted members contributions plus accumulated penalties thereon due and payable to the plaintiffs as per paragraph 9 hereinabove; b) Costs of this suit and any other incidental costs pertaining to the filing of this suit, and; c) Any other/ relief this honourable court may deem fit and just to grant. The facts, of this suit as gathered from the plaint are that, the defendant is registered as contributing mernber employer of the 2"^ plaintiff with the law establishing the 2"^ plaintiff and was issued with membership certificate I with registration No. 1005916 and as such was required in each month to make its own compulsory contribution and that of its employees at the rate of 10 per cent each and remit the same to the 2"^ plaintiff. Despite knowing its legal

obligations towards the 2"^ plaintiff, the defendant has failed, neglected, ignored, and defaulted to remit the members' contributions for some months and the delay has attracted penalties. The act of the defendant JM. is not only against the law but also denies the employees to be paid rightful pension benefits after retirements. Further facts went on that at the institution of this suit, the defendant had defaulted Tshs.l6,160,000/= being principal contribution covering period between June, 2019 and October, 2023 and penalties amounting to Tshs.17,025,000/-. It is against the above background; the plaintiffs instituted the instant suit claiming the amount as indicated in the plaint. / The record of the court is loud and clear that, the plaintiff instituted the instant suit under summary procedure. The efforts by the plaintiff to serve the defendants in normal way done on 24^^ October, 2024 and an affidavit of proof of service was put forward before this court. When this suit was called on for orders on 06^*^ day of February/ 2025, it was noted that despite the defendant being dully served, no application for leave to file defence has been! filed. Consequently,. the-learned State Attorneys for the plaintiffs, Ms. Elfrida Rutashobya and Mr. Baraka Mgaya prayed that, this court to be pleased to grant summary judgement under Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code,[Cap 33,R.E

2019] ready together with section 74A(2) of the Social Security Funds Act,[Cap 50 R.E.2018] as prayed in the plaint. The learned advocate for the plaintiff cited the case of COMMERCIAL BANK OF AFRICA (T) LIMITED vs. ESTER JAPHET MHAYE t/a ESTHER AGRO AND GENERAL SUPPLY AND ANOTHER, COMMERCIAL CASE NO 21 OF 2008 (HCCD) DSM (UNREPORTED) AND NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE LIMITED vs. JACQUILINE MICHAEL KIMARO AND ANOTHER, COMMERCIAL CASE NO.l OF 2017 (HCCD) DSM (UNREPORTED) for guidance and In which a summary judgement was ordered in circumstances similar to this suit. Having considered the learned State Attorneys prayers, this court noted that, there is no dispute that, defendant was served in accordance with the law. However, ever since this suit was instituted Way bacK in 2024, no application for leave to defend summary suit has been preferred and as such no written statement of defence has beep filed so far nor any application for extension of time to file one. In the totality of the above, and without niuch ado, summary,judgement must be and is hereby entered for the plaintiffs and against the defendant in the following orders, namely: , a) This court order the defendant to pay the 2"^ plaintiff TshsJ 33,185,000/= (say Tanzania ShiHings Thirty-Three Million One Hundred Eighty- Five Thousand Only) being un-remitted members contributions pius accumuiated penalties thereon due and payable to the plaintiffs as per paragraph 9 hereinabove; b) Costs of this suit be borne by the defendant; It is so ordered. Dated at Morogoro this 7^^ day of February, 2025. S.M. MAGOIGA ...

JUDGE ^ — 07/02/2025 COURT: Judgement delivered today on 07^^ day of February 2025 in chambers before Eifrida Rutashobya, learned State Attorney for the plaintiffs and in the absence of the defend progoro. e- S.M. lAGOlGA

JUDGE ■>v \ 07/02/2025 COURT: Right of appeal fully explain c ' 's- '/ . S.M.

JUDGE 07/02/2025

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Commercial Bank of Africa (T) Limited vs. Ester Japhet Mhawe t/a Esther Agro and General Supply and Another, Commercial Case No 21 of 2008 (HCCD) DSM (Unreported)

Case cited

National Bank of Commerce Limited vs. Jacquiline Michael Kimaro and Another, Commercial Case No.1 of 2017 (HCCD) DSM (Unreported)

Case cited

Order XXXV of the Civil Procedure Code [Cap 33 R.E.2019]

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Section 74A(2) of the Social Security Funds Act [Cap 50 R.E.2018]

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.