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 application is untenable as granting the declaratory order would jeopardize public interest due to environmental and public policy concerns, outweighing applicants' interests.
Source excerpt
Petitioners' grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award were not raised during arbitration and do not constitute manifest error or violation of natural justice; court is functus officio regarding arbitrator impartiality; accreditation and jurisdictional challenges require timely objection; evidentiary and procedural complaints do not warrant refusal; petition dismissed as lacking merit.
Source excerpt
All grounds for setting aside the arbitral award and additional award fail: violation of public policy was not established, jurisdictional objections were waived by participation and not timely raised, arbitrator acted within scope of broad-form arbitration agreement, alleged errors regarding forged documents and deduction of TZS 80,000,000/= are not grounds for setting aside or remittance as they go to merits and not serious irregularity or jurisdiction. Both petition and cross petition are dismissed.
Source excerpt
The Tribunal's failure to consider the issue of force majeure, which arose by necessary implication from the evidence, and its inadequate evaluation of evidence constituted material irregularities rendering its judgment defective and necessitating a retrial.
Source excerpt
The High Court held that the ICC arbitral award could not coexist with a default decree from the same contract, and allowed the petition to that extent with costs.
The High Court refused to register an arbitral award, holding that the certified variations breached public procurement law and public policy.
The suit was not time-barred as part payments extended the limitation period; the contract was lawful as the respondent was a foreign creditor, not an investor; the outstanding loan of USD 110,000.00 was proved; the counter-claim was invalid as the proceeds were set off against the loan; the respondent had a contractual right to repossess the bakery machineries to the extent of the outstanding debt; and the appellant forcibly took possession causing damage.
Source excerpt
The arbitral award was set aside as a nullity because the 1st respondent, a government entity, was not properly represented in the arbitration proceedings as required by law, violating constitutional and regulatory provisions, public policy, and the right to a fair hearing. The arbitrator also exceeded jurisdiction by apportioning costs contrary to the agreement.
Source excerpt
The agreement between the plaintiff and defendant was champertous, involving a contingent fee for contentious proceedings, and is thus illegal and unenforceable under Tanzanian law, specifically violating section 23 of the Law of Contract Ordinance and section 59 of the Advocates Ordinance. The doctrines of maintenance and champerty apply in Tanzania, and the relevant professional conduct rules do not override statutory prohibitions.
Source excerpt
The agreement between the parties was champertous, involving a contingent fee for litigation, and thus illegal and unenforceable under Tanzanian law, violating S. 23 of the Law of Contracts Ordinance and S. 59 of the Advocates Ordinance. The doctrines of maintenance and champerty apply in Tanzania, and the Advocate's Remuneration Rules do not override substantive law.
Source excerpt
Explore more
