tristar investment company ltd vs citechem co ltd 2022 tzhccomd 245 15 august 2022
The suit was filed prematurely before exhaustion of agreed mediation and arbitration procedures, depriving the court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- tristar investment company ltd vs citechem co ltd 2022 tzhccomd 245 15 august 2022
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Tristars Investment Company Ltd; Defendant: Citechem Company Limited
- Court
- TZHCCOMD
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 15 August 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Commercial Case / Preliminary Objection Ruling
- Outcome
- Suit struck out
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction, Arbitration Clause, Premature Filing
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tristars Investment Company Ltd
Plaintiff
Citechem Company Limited
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Commercial Case / Preliminary Objection Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit was prematurely filed before exhaustion of agreed mediation and arbitration procedures
- 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the matter
Ratio Decidendi
The suit was filed prematurely before exhaustion of agreed mediation and arbitration procedures, depriving the court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
Court Disposition
Suit struck out
Orders
- This suit is hereby struck out.
- The Plaintiff is at liberty to re-file if the parties waive their right to pursue the matter amicably or through arbitration.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) AT DAR-ES-SALAAM COMMERCIAL CASE NO.61 OF 2022 TRISTARS INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD...................PLAINTIFF VERSUS CITECHEM COMPANY LIMITED .............................DEFENDANT Ruling: 15/08/2022 RULING NANGELA, J.: This suit was filed by the Plaintiff on 30 th May 2022. However, the Defendant raised a preliminary point in objection to the continued hearing of this case. In particular, the Defendant raised the following objection: ‘That, this case was filed prematurely before this Court hence, the Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this matter’. Page 1 of 3 On the 15th August 2022, the parties’ learned advocates appeared before me. The Plaintiff enjoyed the services of the Mr Elia Rioba, learned advocate while Mr Damas Sixstus, learned advocate as well, appeared for the Defendant. In addressing this Court, Mr Rioba submitted that, having noted the preliminary objection, he was of a conceding view that, the matter ought to have gone through the agreed process by the parties, i.e., mediation and arbitration before coming to this Court. He thus, conceded to the objection. For his party, Mr Sixtus submitted that, he was not pressing for costs. In view of the fact that the Plaintiff has conceded to the Preliminary Objection, this Court settles for the following orders: 1. This suit is hereby struck out. The Plaintiff is at liberty to re-file it if the parties so agrees to waive their right to pursue the matter amicably or through arbitration. Page 2 of 3 2. The striking out of this suit is with no orders as to costs. It is so ordered. DATED AT DAR-ES-SALAAM ON THIS 15TH AUGUST 2022 ......................................... DEO JOHN NANGELA JUDGE Page 3 of 3