ZCCM Investments Holdings Plc v Kansanshi Holdings Plc & Anor

ZCCM Investments Holdings Plc v Kansanshi Holdings Plc & Anor

The arbitral ruling was not an award but a procedural order, thus no section 68 challenge could arise. Even if it were an award, the tribunal addressed all material issues, and ZCCM failed to demonstrate any serious irregularity or substantial injustice. The fraud claim lacked merit as the ZRA correspondence was not material to the tribunal's determination, and ZCCM failed to satisfy the criteria for extension of time or reasonable diligence.

Parties
Claimant: ZCCM Investments Holdings PLC; Defendant: Kansanshi Holdings PLC; Defendant: Kansanshi Mining PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Related Commercial Court Claim / Judgment on Applications Challenging Arbitral Ruling and Seeking Extension of Time
Outcome
All applications dismissed; claims fail.
Legal Topics
Derivative Claims, Fraud in Arbitration, Procedural Orders Vs Awards, Exhaustion of Remedies, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Shareholder Agreements
Arbitration Commercial Law Derivative Claims Fraud in Arbitration Procedural Orders Vs Awards Exhaustion of Remedies Breach of Fiduciary Duty Shareholder Agreements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ZCCM Investments Holdings PLC

Claimant

Kansanshi Holdings PLC

Defendant

Kansanshi Mining PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Related Commercial Court Claim / Judgment on Applications Challenging Arbitral Ruling and Seeking Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitral ruling was an award or procedural order
  2. 2 Whether the tribunal failed to deal with key issues
  3. 3 Whether the ruling was obtained by fraud

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitral ruling was not an award but a procedural order, thus no section 68 challenge could arise. Even if it were an award, the tribunal addressed all material issues, and ZCCM failed to demonstrate any serious irregularity or substantial injustice. The fraud claim lacked merit as the ZRA correspondence was not material to the tribunal's determination, and ZCCM failed to satisfy the criteria for extension of time or reasonable diligence.

Court Disposition

All applications dismissed; claims fail.

Orders

  • Original Arbitration Claim dismissed
  • Fraud Claim dismissed