vodacom tanzania plc vs tech hub limited 2021 tzhccomd 3323 8 september 2021

The court found that the defendant was properly served but failed to file a defence, and the plaintiff's claim was supported by the agreement and invoices, justifying entry of default judgment for the outstanding amount, interest, and costs.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: vodacom tanzania plc vs tech hub limited 2021 tzhccomd 3323 8 september 2021
Parties: Plaintiff: Vodacom Tanzania PLC; Defendant: Tech Hub Limited
Court: TZHCCOMD
Jurisdiction: Tanzania
Judgment Date: 8 September 2021
Procedural Posture: Commercial Case / Default Judgment
Outcome: default judgment for the plaintiff
Legal Topics: Breach of Contract, Default Judgment, Bulk SMS Service Agreement, Recovery of Debt
Source Language: english

Contract Law Commercial Law Breach of Contract Default Judgment Bulk SMS Service Agreement Recovery of Debt

Source-derived case record

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Vodacom Tanzania PLC

Plaintiff

Tech Hub Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Case / Default Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the defendant is liable to pay the outstanding amount for services rendered under the Bulk SMS Service Agreement
2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interest and costs

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

default judgment for the plaintiff

Orders

Defendant to pay plaintiff TZS 315,569,120 as outstanding amount for services rendered under the Bulk SMS Service Agreement.
Defendant to pay interest on the above amount at the Bank of Tanzania Commercial rate from 1st September, 2019 to the date of judgment.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.