yara tanzania ltd vs db shapriya co ltd 2020 tzca 265 22 april 2020

yara tanzania ltd vs db shapriya co ltd 2020 tzca 265 22 april 2020

The appeal was filed prematurely because the appellant failed to exhaust the remedy of applying to set aside the default judgment in the High Court under rule 23(1) and (2) of the Commercial Court Rules. The existence of an arbitration clause does not exempt the appellant from this procedural requirement.

Citation
yara tanzania ltd vs db shapriya co ltd 2020 tzca 265 22 april 2020
Parties
Appellant: Yara Tanzania Limited; Respondent: DB Shapriya & Co. Limited
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
22 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Preliminary Objection Ruling
Outcome
appeal struck out
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Exhaustion of Remedies, Arbitration Clause, Setting Aside Judgment
Source Language
English

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yara Tanzania Limited

Appellant

DB Shapriya & Co. Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Preliminary Objection Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was required to exhaust remedies in the High Court by applying to set aside the default judgment before appealing to the Court of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the existence of an arbitration clause exempts the appellant from the requirement to apply to set aside the default judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was filed prematurely because the appellant failed to exhaust the remedy of applying to set aside the default judgment in the High Court under rule 23(1) and (2) of the Commercial Court Rules. The existence of an arbitration clause does not exempt the appellant from this procedural requirement.

Court Disposition

appeal struck out

Orders

  • Appeal struck out with costs.