Bromar & Byte (Pvt) Ltd v Wilson Holdings (Pvt) Ltd & Anor (HH 106 of 2004) [2004] ZWHHC 106 (11 May 2004)

Bromar & Byte (Pvt) Ltd v Wilson Holdings (Pvt) Ltd & Anor (HH 106 of 2004) [2004] ZWHHC 106 (11 May 2004)

The defendant breached its contract with the plaintiff by failing to supply the contracted 45 tonne crane, instead supplying an inadequate 18 tonne crane, which caused damage to the incinerator and slab. The plaintiff proved damages and loss of profit as a direct result of the breach. The third party did not breach its contract with the defendant, as its obligation was limited to off-loading, which was performed without incident.

Citation
[2004] ZWHHC 106
Parties
Plaintiff: Bromar and Byte (Pvt) Ltd; Defendant: Wilson Holdings (Pvt) Ltd; Third Party: Terrier Services (Pvt) Ltd
Court
Harare High Court
Jurisdiction
Zimbabwe
Judgment Date
11 May 2004
Case Number
HH 106 of 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
judgment for plaintiff
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages, Third Party Procedure, Indemnity
Source Language
English
Contract Law Tort Law Breach of Contract Damages Third Party Procedure Indemnity

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bromar and Byte (Pvt) Ltd

Plaintiff

Wilson Holdings (Pvt) Ltd

Defendant

Terrier Services (Pvt) Ltd

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant breached the contract with the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff suffered damages as a result of the breach and the quantum of damages
  3. 3 What were the terms of the contract between the defendant and third party

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant breached its contract with the plaintiff by failing to supply the contracted 45 tonne crane, instead supplying an inadequate 18 tonne crane, which caused damage to the incinerator and slab. The plaintiff proved damages and loss of profit as a direct result of the breach. The third party did not breach its contract with the defendant, as its obligation was limited to off-loading, which was performed without incident.

Court Disposition

judgment for plaintiff

Orders

  • Judgment entered in favour of plaintiff against defendant for $577,423.32 with interest at the prescribed rate from October 1996 for damage to the incinerator.
  • Interest at the prescribed rate from 5th November 1997 for engineer’s fees.