Tanzania Case Law

dar es salaam international academy vs catic international engineering t ltd 2022 tzhccomd 263 31 august 2022

Court

TZHCCOMD

The court found that the arbitral tribunal did not exceed its powers or fail to deal with all issues raised. The alleged errors did not constitute serious irregularities under section 75(2) of the Arbitration Act. The tribunal provided reasons for dismissing the counterclaim and acted within its jurisdiction. The petitioner's grounds were insufficient to set aside the award.

Source excerpt

• Challenge to arbitral award
• Serious irregularity
• Liquidated damages
• Mitigation of damages
• Rectification costs

Read case analysis

chinese tanzania joint shipping line sinotaship vs karaka enteprises ltd 2021 tzhccomd 3434 1 december 2021

Court

TZHCCOMD

Commercial dispute over a missing container and an undelivered dump truck. The court found both parties to blame for the container issue, but held the defendant liable for USD 55,607.

• Breach of contract
• Demurrage charges
• Mitigation of damages
• Doctrine of frustration
• Interest on judgment debt
• Breach-of-contract

Read case analysis

standard chartered bank tanzania limited vs national oil tanzania limited another 2013 tzca 228 5 february 2013

Court

TZCA

The appellant, Standard Chartered Bank, wrongfully converted the proceeds of a genuine cheque by processing and crediting it to a party not entitled to it, acting negligently and without good faith. The omission to endorse documentary evidence did not cause injustice and did not invalidate the trial record. The respondents, as true owners, were entitled to recover the cheque amount and general damages, subject to reduction for failure to mitigate loss.

Source excerpt

• Wrongful conversion
• Cheque processing
• Burden of proof
• Negligence
• Good faith in banking
• Strict liability

Read case analysis

chuo cha uongozi wa maendeleo idm vs jonathan nk kaini 2007 tzhc 308 9 october 2007

Court

TZHC

The court found that the trial court's findings regarding improper computation of PPF contributions were confused and contradictory, as no specific award was made for improper computation. The respondent was entitled to subsistence allowance only for the period between termination and payment of terminal benefits (31/7/97 to 17/2/98), which had already been paid and acknowledged. No further subsistence allowance was due. The employer was not civilly liable to the employee for unremitted pension contributions, as such claims are recoverable by the Fund, not the employee.

Source excerpt

• Terminal benefits
• Subsistence allowance
• Pension contributions
• Mitigation of damages
• Costs

Read case analysis

uongozi wa mendeleo vs kaini 2007 tzhc 15 9 october 200

Court

TZHC

The court found that the appellant was responsible for timely payment of the respondent's terminal benefits and allowances, and that the respondent was entitled to subsistence allowance only up to the date when the benefits were paid. Compensation for delay was acknowledged, and further claims were not justified beyond the period of lawful entitlement.

Source excerpt

• Termination of employment
• Computation of terminal benefits
• Subsistence allowance
• Mitigation of damages
• Costs

Read case analysis

19850627 TZHC Dar es Salaam

Court

TZHC

The High Court allowed an appeal over a landlord’s unlawful break-in, held the tenant was entitled to damages, and reduced the award to TZS 2,000.

• Unlawful entry
• Damages for loss of property
• Tenant's rights
• Mitigation of damages
• Unlawful-entry
• Tenant-rights

Read case analysis

19731022 TZHC Mwanza

Court

TZHC

The High Court upheld liability for injuring a trespassing cow, but reduced the award because the claimant likely consumed or sold the meat, requiring mitigation.

• Damage to property
• Mitigation of damages
• Animal trespass
• Tort-law
• Mitigation-of-damages
• Animal-trespass

Read case analysis