Berril & Co. Ltd. v. Lakhani and Other Civ. Cases 63 & 68-D-67; Georges C.J.

Berril & Co. Ltd. v. Lakhani and Other Civ. Cases 63 & 68-D-67; Georges C.J.

These were applications for leave to execute judgments in Civil Cases Nos. 63. And 68 of 1967, being suits for sums due on Bills of Exchange drawn in London for amounts expressed in Sterling. In the plaints the amount for which the Bills had been drawn were expressed in Sterling though in the pages they were stated in shillings as well the conversion rates being 20/- to the ₤. The conversion rate became 17/- Tanzanian currency to the ₤ after devaluation of the sterling in November 1967. It was argued by the defendant that payment in the Sterling equivalent of the judgment in Tanzania Currency would satisfy the obligation; that since the Bills were set out in Sterling in the plaint and advice the judgment was given “as prayed”, it must be presumed that the judgment was recorded in ₤Sterling and not in Tanzania shillings.

            Held: (1) “On the facts I do not think that this submission is tenable. In suit No. 63/1967 the prayer set out the sums claimed in shillings alone. There was no mention of Pounds. In suit No. 68/1967 although the sum claimed was set out in ₤, its equivalent in shillings was set out in brackets immediately thereafter. I see no reason to think that in either case the Court intended the sum set out in shillings to be English shillings rather than Tanzanian shillings.” (2) “A Tanzania Court ought to give judgment in Tanzania Currency only. “Mr. Singh argues that there was no reason why this should be so and that there were countries which permitted their courts to give judgment in currency other than the national currency. He did not cite any particular jurisdiction but he had some support form the judgment of Lord Denning M.R. in The Hu [1969]3 W.L.R. 1135. ….. the rule in England has always been that English Courts can only enter judgment in ₤ sterling ….. (See Manners v. Pearson & Son [1898] 1 ch. 581) ….. [His Lordship then set out the terms of s. 2(2) of the Judicature and Application of Laws Act Cap. 453 which empowers the High Court to exercise its jurisdiction in conformity with English practice and continued] ……”I am satisfied that on the 22^nd July 1920 the practice of the courts in England was that judgment should not be entered in any currency other than the national currency. It was a settled principle about which there was no controversy. The effect of the Judicature and Application of Laws Ordinance as quoted above is to make this procedure applicable to the High Court of Tanganyika. There is nothing in local circumstances which make it inapplicable and indeed it is a principle widely accepted in most domestic jurisdiction. Accordingly I find that the Court of this country can enter judgment only in Tanzanian shillings.” (3) His Lordship set out Section 33(1) of the Exchange Control Act and continued) ….. “Because of this section Mr. Singh contended that payment of the judgment debt was not possible until such time as Exchange Control permission had been obtained and that that date should be taken as the date on which conversion from pounds sterling to Tanzanian shillings should take place. He cited in support Cummings –v- London Bullion Co. Ltd. [1952] 1 A.E.R. 383. In my view that authority is totally inapplicable in this case. …… There is no doubt now that the English rule as to conversion is that the appropriate now that the English rule as to conversion is that the appropriate date is the date on which the liability to pay arise. …. The section of the Exchange Control Ordinance cited above made treasury permission an implied term of the contract and for that reason the liability to pay  did not arise until the date on which permission to remit was given. Accordingly that date was the appropriate date for conversion date is concerned when a suit is filed before permission to remit the money is obtained. Once a suit is filed here in Tanganyika the plaintiff can be taken to have opted to accept the shilling equivalent of his debt deposited in Court. Questions as to having this sum remitted to England would still depend on Treasury permission and it would then be the business of the plaintiff to seek and obtain such permission.” (4) “For these reasons I would rule that the judgment debt would not, by payment of Tanzanian shillings to the equivalent of  the sterling value of the Bills of Exchange, be satisfied, and that leave to execute value of the Bills of Exchange, be satisfied, and that leave to execute should be granted. The exact amount due is a matter for calculation and the parties can no doubt among themselves and inform the Court so that it can be recorded by consent.”