Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the petition to set aside the arbitral award after it has been registered, recognized, and enforced as a decree; the Court is functus officio and cannot revisit the merits of the award.
Source excerpt
Petition challenging an arbitral award was struck out as prematurely filed, before the award had been filed for recognition and enforcement. Costs were ordered at 50%.
Failure to properly admit and record exhibits in arbitral proceedings is a procedural impropriety that causes injustice and warrants nullification of the proceedings, quashing of the award, and a trial de novo before a different arbitrator.
Source excerpt
The High Court set aside an arbitral award after finding unilateral communication between the arbitrator and one party, amounting to serious irregularity.
The High Court set aside an arbitral award for serious irregularity, holding that the award condoned unapproved variations contrary to contract and public procurement law.
The High Court set aside an additional arbitral award for being time-barred and made without jurisdiction, while rejecting the allegation of bias.
The High Court set aside an additional arbitral award as time-barred, holding the arbitrator lacked jurisdiction after expiry of the statutory periods.
The arbitrator committed a serious irregularity by failing to record or provide minutes or proceedings as required by law and as understood by both parties. There was no evidence that the parties agreed to dispense with such records. The absence of proceedings or minutes deprived both parties of the ability to enforce or challenge the award in court. The irregularity was fundamental and affected the fairness of the arbitral process. Remitting the award for reconsideration was inappropriate due to the absence of any record of proceedings; thus, the award was set aside in whole.
Source excerpt
The Sole Arbitrator lacked substantive jurisdiction because the underlying Milling Agreement, including the arbitration clause, was void for want of capacity as required by section 40A(1)(m) of the Public Corporation Act, Cap.257 [R.E 2002]. Consequently, the arbitral award is invalid and must be set aside in whole.
Source excerpt
The High Court recorded that Water Aid Tanzania’s application to set aside an arbitral award was withdrawn after the parties settled the underlying dispute.
Explore more
