BAY VIEW PROPERTY LTD AND HERBERT ELIEZER LIWALI MISC
- Citation
- BAY VIEW PROPERTY LTD AND HERBERT ELIEZER LIWALI MISC
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Court
- TANZLII
- Decision
- 1 January 2018
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Commercial Cause / Ruling on Application for Appointment of Sole Arbitrator
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- TANZLII
- Decision
- 1 January 2018
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Commercial Cause / Ruling on Application for Appointment of Sole Arbitrator
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
Since both parties failed to agree on the appointment of a sole arbitrator as required by the Lease Agreement, and both consented to the court's intervention, the court appointed a sole arbitrator and ordered each party to bear its own costs.
Court disposition
Application granted
Orders
- Thomas B. Mihayo, J (Rtd) appointed as sole arbitrator
- Dispute referred to sole arbitrator for determination in accordance with the Lease Agreement
- Each party to bear its own costs
02
Material facts
Parties
Bay View Property Limited
Petitioner Counsel: KagirwaHerbert Eliezer Liwali
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Commercial Cause / Ruling on Application for Appointment of Sole Arbitrator
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the court should appoint a sole arbitrator under the Lease Agreement and relevant arbitration rules
- 02
Whether costs should be awarded to the petitioner
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The petitioner requested the court to appoint a sole arbitrator as per clause 15 of the Lease Agreement after parties failed to agree, and later waived the prayer for costs.
- Respondent
- The respondent did not oppose the appointment of a sole arbitrator but objected to the award of costs to the petitioner.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Rule 17(4) of the Civil Procedure (Arbitration) Rules GN. 376 of 1968, 2nd schedule to the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 33
Where parties fail to agree on the appointment of an arbitrator as stipulated in their agreement, the court may appoint an arbitrator under the relevant arbitration rules.
- 02
Court's discretion and parties' submissions
Each party shall bear its own costs where the petitioner waives the prayer for costs and the respondent objects to costs being awarded.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
Since both parties failed to agree on the appointment of a sole arbitrator as required by the Lease Agreement, and both consented to the court's intervention, the court appointed a sole arbitrator and ordered each party to bear its own costs.
Court disposition
Application granted
- Thomas B. Mihayo, J (Rtd) appointed as sole arbitrator
- Dispute referred to sole arbitrator for determination in accordance with the Lease Agreement
- Each party to bear its own costs
Source and reliance status
TANZLII · 1 January 2018
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
TANZLII
Judgment· 1 January 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (COMMERCIAL DIVISION)
AT PAR ES SALAAM MISCELLANEOUS COMMERCIAL CAUSE NO. 2 OF 2018 IN THE MATTER OF THE ARBITRATION ACT (CAP. 15 R.E. 2002), SECTION 8(1) (a) AND (2) AND IN THE MAHER OF RULE 17 (1), (2), (3) AND (4) OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE (ARBITRATION) RULES, GN. 376 OF 1968; THE SECOND SCHEDULE TO THE CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE (CAP. 33 R.E.
2002)
AND
IN THE MAHER OF ARBITRATION
BETWEEN BAY VIEW PROPERTY LIMITED................... ............. ........PETITIONER AND HERBERT ELIEZER UWALI......................... RESPONDENT
RULING Pursuant to Rule 17(1); (2); (3) and (4) of the Civil Procedure (Arbitration) Rules GN. 376 OF 1968, 2nd schedule to the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 33, Bay view property Limited (the Petitioner) has petitioned to this Court requesting for a dispute between the Petitioner and Herbert Eliezer Liwali (the Respondent) be referred to the sole Arbitrator as per clause 15 of the parties' Lease Agreement entered on 9th day of June, 2011 and amended from time to time after parties failed to agree. The Respondent does not dispute the prayer for appointment of the sole arbitrator but argued that the Petitioner should not be granted costs. Counsel Kagirwa who appeared to represent the Petitioner opted to waive the prayer for costs and requested for the court to grant their prayer for appointment of the sole arbitrator. Since parties are in agreement that they failed to agree to appoint a sole arbitrator to resolve their dispute by way of arbitration in accordance with clause 15 of the Lease Agreement, then pursuant to Rule 17(4) of the Civil Procedure (Arbitration) Rules GN. 376 of 1968 2nd schedule to the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 33 I do hereby appoint Thomas B. Mihayo, J (Rtd) to be the sole arbitrator and pursuant to clause 15 of the Lease Agreement their dispute is referred to the sole arbitrator for determination in accordance with the provisions of the Lease Agreement. In that respect, the application is granted and each party shall bear its own costs. It is so 2
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.