| dc.description | SINYOMA COMPANY LIMITED V. BULYANHULU GOLD MINE LIMITED
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA – DAR ES SALAAM
MWARIJA. J.A. KEREFU. J.A. and KENTE, J.A. 18th February & 29th June, 2022
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 172 OF 2017
(An Appeal from the judgement of the High Court of Tanzania (Commercial Division) at Dar es Salaam in Commercial Case No.102 of 2014 dated 24th February,2016 by Hon. Songoro, J)
Facts
This appeal arises from, the facts that, the Appellant (Buyer) instituted a suit against the Respondent (seller) following a dispute emanating over a contract termed as “Purchase and Transport of Scrap Materials Sales Agreement. Among terms and conditions were clause 24 and 25 which required the Appellant to obtain insurance premiums for inte alia workers compensation, employers liability, public liability as well as motor vehicles and equipment insurance premiums which were to be paid in USD currency. Business commenced on 6/12/2012 where the Appellant bought 28000 kgs of scrap materials worth TZS 7,150,000, a day later the Appellant received a letter from the Respondent that the contract is terminated since the Appellant has failed to comply with conditions setout in clauses 24 and 25 of the contract. The appellant was dissatisfied with the termination hence instituted a suit. The trial court found that the termination was fair and just. The High Court ordered payment of special damages to the tune of TZS 87,866,000 and USD 400 for expenses incurred by the Appellant also general damages to the tune of TZS 150,000,000/=, interest on the decretal sum and costs of the suit. However, the Appellant was still aggrieved for the court to hold that the Respondent was justified first, to terminate the contract and secondly that some claims by the Appellant were not proved, hence raised 12 grounds of appeal in this court.
For the Appellant: Mr. Mpaya Kamara
For the Respondent: Mr. Faustine Malongo & Ms. Caroline Kivuyo
Legal Issue
iii. Whether termination by immediate effect is premature?
Held
iii) Termination of contract must be preceded by 14 days’ notice within which the appellant remedy the breach or offer adequate compensation to save the contract from being terminated.
Civil Practise & Procedure – Contract-Termination for breach- whether requirement of notice is mandatory?
Statutory Provisions referred:
Rule 106(1) & (7) The Tanzania Court of Appeal Rules, 2009 as amended
Case Law:
Anna Moises Chisano vs. Republic, Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 2019 (unreported)
Hatari Masharubu@ Babu Ayubu vs. Republic, Criminal Appeal No.590 of 2017 (unreported) | en_US |
