Tanzania Case Law

patrick lutandula mihayo another vs crdb bank plc 2023 tzhclandd 17235 20 december 2023

Court

TANZLII

Failure to plead and annex a board resolution in the plaint does not render the suit incompetent where the resolution is annexed in the reply to the written statement of defence, and the suit involves two plaintiffs, one of whom is a natural person not requiring a board resolution. The preliminary objection cannot dispose of the entire suit and is therefore overruled.

Source excerpt

• Board resolution requirement
• Company litigation
• Pleading requirements
• Preliminary objection

Read case analysis

ncg chemical industries limited company vs amri bakari malombora 60 others 2023 tzhclandd 16811 25 august 2023

Court

TANZLII

The suit is incompetent because it was instituted by the company without an express board resolution authorizing the filing, as required by section 147(1) of the Companies Act and established case law. The absence of such a resolution is a jurisdictional defect.

Source excerpt

• Board resolution requirement
• Jurisdiction
• Company litigation
• Preliminary objection

Read case analysis

oxley ltd vs nyarugusu mine co ltd another 2023 tzhccomd 19 13 february 2023

Court

TZHCCOMD

The High Court struck out a company’s suit after holding that a board resolution was mandatory and had not been attached or pleaded in the plaint.

• Board resolution requirement
• Company litigation
• Procedural compliance
• Board-resolution-requirement
• Company-law
• Civil-procedure

Read case analysis

kati general enterprises limited vs equity bank tanzania limited and another 2021 tzhc 5756 13 august 2021

Court

TZHC

It is mandatory for a company to plead and annex to the plaint a board of directors' resolution authorizing institution of the suit and appointment of advocate; failure to do so renders the suit incompetent and liable to be struck out.

Source excerpt

• Board resolution requirement
• Company litigation
• Verification of pleadings
• Director qualification

Read case analysis

robert philipo masangwa vs nida textiles mills 2017 tzhc 2130 15 december 2017

Court

TZHC

The suit was not properly instituted as the claim form was not signed by an authorized officer of the respondent company, and the contract forming the basis of the claim was not available in the court file, rendering the lower courts' decisions unsustainable.

Source excerpt

• Locus standi
• Company litigation
• Proof of contract
• Jurisdiction of primary courts

Read case analysis