GJIS

GJIS

Petitioners failed to prove misconduct or improper procurement of the arbitral award; all grounds for challenge were dismissed as lacking evidence or legal merit; parties consented to procedure followed; allegations of bias, disregard of evidence, and breach of natural justice were unsupported; court's power to set aside award is limited to statutory grounds, none of which were established.

Citation
GJIS
Parties
Petitioner: GJIS P. DE RAADT; Petitioner: MOIVARO INVESTMENT & TRADING COMPANY LTD; Respondent: JAN W. HALFWERK; Respondent: GERT BORST; Respondent: PATRICK R. DEVINE
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
1 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Cause / Ruling on Petition Challenging Arbitral Award Registration
Outcome
petition dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Challenge to Arbitral Award, Registration of Arbitral Award, Misconduct of Arbitrator, Preliminary Objections, Bias, Contract Validity, Natural Justice
Source Language
English
Arbitration Civil Procedure Challenge to Arbitral Award Registration of Arbitral Award Misconduct of Arbitrator Preliminary Objections Bias Contract Validity +1 more

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GJIS P. DE RAADT

Petitioner

MOIVARO INVESTMENT & TRADING COMPANY LTD

Petitioner

JAN W. HALFWERK

Respondent

GERT BORST

Respondent

PATRICK R. DEVINE

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Cause / Ruling on Petition Challenging Arbitral Award Registration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator failed to determine preliminary objections before hearing the arbitration
  2. 2 Whether the arbitrator maliciously ignored issues proposed by petitioners and entertained those of respondents
  3. 3 Whether the award was based on void ab initio agreements and ignored terms of the memorandum of understanding

Ratio Decidendi

Petitioners failed to prove misconduct or improper procurement of the arbitral award; all grounds for challenge were dismissed as lacking evidence or legal merit; parties consented to procedure followed; allegations of bias, disregard of evidence, and breach of natural justice were unsupported; court's power to set aside award is limited to statutory grounds, none of which were established.

Court Disposition

petition dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Arbitral Award dated 21st September, 2012 registered as decree of the court
  • Award to be enforced as decree of the court