African Inland Container Depot Limited vs Abble Logistics Limited (Civil Appeal No. 5890 of 2026) [2026] TZCA 228 (4 March 2026)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT PAR ES SALAAM CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 307 OF 2026 AFRICAN INLAND CONTAINER DEPOT LIM ITE D .............................APPLICANT VERSUS ABBLE LOGISTICS LIMITED ................................................................ RESPONDENT (An application for an order for Stay of Execution of the Judgment and decree of the High Court of Tanzania, Commercial Division at Dar es Salaam) (Kinvaka. 3 .) Dated the 3rd day of December, 2025 in Commercial Case No. 11706 of 2025 RULING 27th February& 4h March, 2026 KITUSI. J.A.: This application for stay of execution has been filed under a certificate of urgency. The applicant's counsel Mr. Sabas Shayo who prosecuted the application stated in addition and it was not disputed that there is already an appeal pending in the Court, Civil Appeal No. 5890 of 2026. Mr. Frank Kifunda, learned advocate represented the respondent. Right at the beginning, Mr. Kifunda made the respondent's position clear that he was not contesting the application but for one factor, that is failure to demonstrate substantial loss. The brief background to the case, which is also a matter of common standing is a follows: the respondent had succeeded in the suit against the applicant in Commercial Case No. 11706 of 2025 arising out of a contract known as Transit and Local Agreement. The High Court granted the respondent USD 224094.14 being demurrage costs to be paid by the applicant. The applicant filed a notice of appeal within the prescribed time and during the hearing he informed me that an appeal has actually been lodged. The essence of this application is that despite the lodging of the notice of appeal followed by filing of the appeal, the respondent has issued a notice of execution and a garnished order nisi has been issued against the applicant's bank accounts. Mr. Shayo referred me to the grounds of the application and the affidavit establishing that substantial loss will be incurred by the applicant if execution is left to proceed. Mr. Shayo submitted that the applicant has satisfied the conditions for issuance of stay of execution by filing the appeal, undertaking to furnish security for the performance of the decree in the event of the appeal being decided against the said applicant. He further insisted that the applicant's constitutional right of appeal will be violated if the intended execution is not stayed. On the other hand, Mr. Kifunda submitted that he has no issue with the compliance with the conditions stipulated under rule 11 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2009 (the Rules) except that under rule 11 (5) (a) which is on establishment of substantial loss. 2 The learned counsel maintained that although the affidavit alleges possible substantial loss on the part of the applicant, the same has been asserted in general terms without so much as establishing specifically the nature and degree of the loss. He cited two decisions of the Court for the principle that the applicant must be specific as opposed to general. The cases cited by counsel are The Registered Trustees of Kanisa la Upendo wa Krisho Masiha (KIUMA) v. The Registered Trustees of Kituo cha Elimu na Maendeleo Matemanga (Matemanga Education and Development Centre (KIUMA) Trust Fund [2025] TZCA 391 and Elia Mwamafupa and 11 Others v. The Board of the Registered Trustees of the Baptist Church of Tanzania [2024] TZCA 844 In my view, the requirement for an applicant to be specific in pleading substantial loss is situational because it depends on the nature of the loss and the circumstances prevailing in each case. For instance, where execution is in a form of eviction from a dwelling house or from a prime business centre or even where it threatens loss of goodwill, specificity may not be easy to achieve. In the instant case a garnishee order has been issued against four bank accounts maintained by the applicant. That may cause quite a good deal of business hiccups on the part of the applicants. I also take into 3 account the fact that an appeal has already been filed and that may be rendered nugatory if execution is left to proceed. On those grounds, I grant the application and order stay of the intended execution of the decree in Commercial Case No. 11706 of 2025 pending hearing and determination of Civil Appeal No. 5890 of 2026. This order is subject to the applicant furnishing security in the form of a banker's guarantee for the decretal amount, within 60 days of this order. Costs to be in the main cause. DATED at DAR ES SALAAM this 2n d March day of March, 2026. Ruling delivered this 4th day of March, 2026 in the presence of Ms. Oliver Mark, learned counsel for the Applicant, Mr. David Kasanga, learned counsel for the Respondent and Ms. Janekisa Bukuku, Court clerk is hereby certified as a true copy of the original. I. P. KITUSI JUSTICE OF APPEAL 4