Philemon Joseph Chacha and Others vs South African Airways and Others (Commercial Case No. 57 of 2000) [2000] TZHC 97 (17 October 2000)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) AT DAR ES SALAAM. COMM. CASE NO. 57 OF 2000 l .PHILEMON JOSEPH CHACHA } 2.LESLIE NDIMBO } 3.JASON FIGUEIREDO ...... } PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS 4.KALUNDE KASIGA } VERSUS I.SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS } 2.CHRIS J.M.ZWEIGENTHAL } 3.SUNSHINE TRAVEL & TOURS Ltd} ......... DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS 4.HANIN SEIF t/a DISTRICT . SALES MANAGER SAA/S.A. ALLIANCE AIR} Counsel: Dr. Kapinga for the Applicants. RULING DR. BWANA, J. . On 12 October, 2000, this court gra~ted exparte injunctions in favour of the current plaintiffs-respondents. One of the three Orders is now being a subject of mis interpretation. It stated:- "(3) A temporary injunction is granted restraining the first and second defendants from terminating or in any way from interfering with the air craft Lease Agreement between the first defendant and AJASISA ALLIANCE AIR and/or from interfering with the normal operations of aircraft B767-200 ER" Now, according to the present Chamber Application also filed under a Certificate of urgency and pursuant to Order XXXVII R 5 of the CPC, a 1

South African Airlines B767-200 ER Registration No.ZSSRB, flight No. SA 187 flying from Dar es Salaam Airport to Johannesburg today, has been detained claiming is by Order of this Court, presumably the above quoted injunction. Having examined my relevant order of 12 October 2000 and the alleged detention of the material aircraft, I am of the considered view that the alleged detention is not correct, for the following reasons:-

1. None of my orders dated 12/10/2000 did impose a detention of any aircraft. What it did was to restrain the said defendants/respondents from terminating or in any way from interfering with, inter alia, the normal operations of an air craft B 767-200 ER.
2. The meaning of the foregoing paragraph is that the said aircraft (belonging or leased by AJAS/S.A. ALLIANCE AIR) should be allowed to continue with its operations, the present court case, not withstanding. Nototherwise.
3. The said aircraft is one leased by AJAS/S.A. ALLIANCE AIR. The aircraft currently under detention, I am made to believe through this Application, belongs to South African Airlines. These are two different airlines. Therefore it is wrongly detained. Under these circumstances and pursuant to Order XXXVII RS of the CPC, I do make the following order:- That, a South African Airlines air craft B 767-200 ER with Registration No.ZSSRB (flight No. SA 187) currently detained at DIA, be release 2 _,.

• • 'I t ) . forthwith and be allowed to continue its flight. Further, I do Order the Officerlncharge of the Police at DIA and the Civil Aviation Authority to be served with this order and facilitate its implementation. Sgd: S. J. Bwana JUDGE 3