Draft Defense

Back to: Author Before Tribunal

1.
This case requires clear distinction between

1. Mr. Kees van Vianen as a private person, hereafter also called "my host",
2. Mrs. Jane Kamkala, as a private person, hereafter also referred to as "my hosts girlfriend"
3. Kamkala Sinnautics Tanzania Ltd., hereafter called "claimant".

2.
The issue is essentially that of a friendship which went sour.

3.
In July 2006, I was invited to stay in that little room (3 by 3 meters) by my host. At the time we were good friends.

4.
The agreement was that of a friend offering to host a friend in a room. My host refused my offer to rent the room. Therefore, I proposed to show my gratitude for the hosting by buying a dinner table and chairs, which were lacking in the house, rented not by me but by two other dwellers who did not have the money to buy these assets.

5.
I know Mrs. Jane Kamkala. She was presented to me by my host as his girlfriend. Of course, it is not my business who my host at any time has as his girlfriend.

6.
My host's girlfriend was not present when I made my agreements about the room with my host and - at the time - friend. May be my host and his girlfriend communicated about it, in which case there have been profound misunderstandings in that process. A fortiori, my host's girlfriend is not even a witness

7.
My friendship with my host cooled after he had used $ 3500 I had entrusted to him in claimant. Only after great effort, months of delay and heavy pressure I could retrieve it. One week after, it was stolen from my room without any traces of house entrance by force. After these events, my host rarely communicated with me. I see KST's step to the tribunal rather as resulting form an emotional scar than from rational considerations.

8.
In one of her frequent attacks of outrage that she is generally known for, my host's girlfriend wrote me a two page letter "We Africans may be poor but we are not stupid" (attached). She did write as a private person, not as a representative of my host, nor of claimant. Claimant was not mentioned at all in that letter, nor was my host. Hence I considered the letter as irrelevant. Nevertheless, I told the messenger of the letter, Mr. Gerald Kamkala, her brother, and a tenant of the house in which my host gave me a room, that I would be ready to deal with it as soon as he, Mr. Gerald Kamkala, who seemed to me the instigator, had returned to me his drinking debts. For the rest I waited for the position on this issue of my host.

9.
My host did not state any grievances or problems or to me, nor did he state a wish for me to leave the room, nor did he state to me that his girlfriend was authorized to act on his behalf, or on behalf of claimant., nor did my host's girlfriend state she was.

10.
End of January Mr. Gerald Kamkala, came home drunk at five o'clock in the morning and tried, in the presence of me, his girlfriend, his brother and the watchman, to break my mkola hardwood door. Though that was a difficult and time consuming job, at five thirty he finally managed. All the time he was screaming: "I'm drunk, I don't know what I'm doing!". I discussed the matter with my host, the other tenant and the owner of the house. My host did not want to give an opinion at all and the others judged Mr. Gerald Kamkala should be given another chance. In the absence of any further communication with my host, I honestly believed he did not have any problems with me using the room, but under the circumstances of disagreeable domestic violence I did not anymore feel comfortable in the house. For that reason, on Wednesday February 1, 2006, I left the room to camp at Mwanza Yacht Club. For further details on the sequence of events I refer to the internet index page The Kamkala Soap

11.
The house is only reachable over steep roads. On February 1, 2006 I informed my host by telephone that I had left the house. I asked him to help me with his 4WD to remove my remaining boxes. He refused. That was the first time I started to suspect he might have grievances. But again he did not state any. Anyhow, if he really would have been serious in having me out fast, he should have decided to cooperate with my operation of leaving the house on February 1. On February 7 I managed to find an affordable alternative and removed the remaining boxes from the little room in which I was staying.

12.
On February 2, 2006, one day after I had left the room, I received a summons of your honourable Tribunal.

13.
Only in the summons I learned that the house in which my host had given me a room was rented by claimant, Kamkala Sinnautics Tanzania Ltd. I was not informed about that. I thought I had been dealing with my host privately. I was not renting. Of course, in such a situation, there was no contract. If I had been informed that I would be using the assets of a registered Tanzanian company, then I would not have accepted the hosting since I do not endorse misuse of company resources: I clearly have no productive relation to claimant, except my involuntary role as a creditor of $ 3500 for a few months, not de jure, but de facto, so why would I stay in a claimant-house? No way, if I would have been informed about this.

14.
Not only had I had moved out the day before the summons - uninformed that is was going to come. On that same day I had informed my host by phone. In this conversation he did not mention I could expect a summons. After the receipt of the summons I phoned him again. He said he "knew about it indirectly", and he "could do nothing about it".

15.
My only indication my host could have a problem was the private letter from his girlfriend (vid. #8). I do not know the constitution of claimant. I do not know how the relation of my host is formalized in the constitution of claimant. In the summons, but that was too late, I learned that Mr. Jane Kamkala is a representative of claimant, at least for this case. Whether she is free lance, only for this case, or she has another more durable job or title in claimant I do not know. The first time ever that claimant directs itself to me with its wish to leave the room is in this summons. Hence it is my opinion that the law suit of claimant is premature. Claimant - and not my host's girlfriend - should first have informed  me that

1. claimant was the contract renter of the house.
2. claimant wanted me to leave the room

I was not informed by claimant. about either.

16.
The law suit is not only premature. It is also superfluous, since I left the house because of alcohol misuse and consequent behaviour problems of tenant Gerald Kamkala even before I received the summons, before having been informed by a relevant person or institution that I were wished to leave.

17.
If the court judges in its wisdom that indeed the suit is premature as well as superfluous, I kindly request the court to have my expenses made good. Since in my view the case does not deserve to be made a big thing of, I am ready to be satisfied with a reimbursement of TSh 100 000/=, which will also make me wave my hardware purchases for the house (light, locks and keys) and the remaining drinking debts of Mr. Gerald Kamkala.