The High Court ordered a bank to return security documents retained after performance guarantee dealings and awarded TZS 20 million in general damages.
Charged properties that are the subject of the decree and no longer in the hands of the applicants cannot serve as security for due performance of the decree. Applicants must provide a different form of security, specifically a bank guarantee for the decretal sum, to obtain a stay of execution.
The application was dismissed because the applicant filed for extension of time after the expiry of the period granted by the Court for depositing the bank guarantee, making the application misconceived as there was nothing left to extend.
The only security properly offered and agreed by both parties is a bank guarantee, as stated in the affidavit; therefore, the stay of execution is granted on condition that the applicant deposits a bank guarantee of the decretal amount within 60 days.
The striking out of the main appeal does not render the cross-appeal incompetent; the cross-appeal stands independently and may proceed on the existing record. Leave is granted to file a supplementary record to include missing documents necessary for the cross-appeal.
The High Court ordered Exim Bank to furnish a bank guarantee as security for due performance of the decree after finding a mere undertaking was insufficient.
Applicant complied with all statutory conditions for stay of execution; amount to be stayed is TZS 45,600,000.00 per High Court decree; applicant to furnish bank guarantee within thirty days; discretion on security and time lies with the court.
The warrant of attachment was erroneously issued while a stay order from the Court of Appeal was in force and pending applications remained undetermined. The proper forum for lifting the warrant is the issuing court. Restoration of attached properties is warranted to maintain status quo until the Court of Appeal resolves the pending matters.
High Court commercial case finding a distributorship agreement, breach by the defendant, wrongful bank guarantee recall, and dismissal of the defendant's counterclaim.
Failure to join Mogas Tanzania Limited, a necessary party, rendered the High Court proceedings a nullity because the dispute could not be effectually and completely adjudicated without Mogas being joined.