Tanzania Case Law

PDFTCMSource9j7ud

Court

TANZLII

The application for recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award was filed beyond the 60 days limitation period prescribed by Item 21 of Part III of the Schedule to the Law of Limitation Act for applications under the Arbitration Act; therefore, the application is time barred and must be dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Time limitation for filing arbitral awards
• Jurisdictional objections
• Application of limitation act to arbitration act

Read case analysis

CANOPIES VS TARURA MISC

Court

TANZLII

There being no opposition from the respondent and no statutory or public policy grounds under section 83(2) of the Arbitration Act to refuse recognition and enforcement, the court recognized and enforced the arbitral award as a decree of the court.

Source excerpt

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Public policy exception
• Arbitrability
• Costs of arbitration

Read case analysis

MS SHABBIRDIN

Court

TANZLII

The supplementary arbitral award on remission is recognized and enforceable as a decree of the High Court because there are no legal obstacles under section 83(2)(b) of the Arbitration Act, the subject matter is arbitrable, and enforcement does not contravene any Tanzanian law or public policy. The respondent did not oppose the application, and the court found no ex officio grounds to refuse recognition.

Source excerpt

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Remission of arbitral awards
• Construction contracts
• Breach of contract

Read case analysis

FINAL RULING MCA 1017 OF 2024 current

Court

TANZLII

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

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal
• Accreditation of arbitrators
• Public policy
• Natural justice

Read case analysis

TARURA VS CANOPIES INTER NATIONAL MISC

Court

TANZLII

A party aggrieved by an arbitral award does not need to wait for the other party to file for recognition and enforcement before challenging the award. The limitation period for challenging the award runs from the date of the award (or notification of the result of any arbitral appeal/review), not from the date of filing for recognition. Filing of the award in court is complete upon its receipt by the court registry. Since the applicant is out of time to challenge the award, extension of time is necessary before such a challenge can be entertained.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Challenge to arbitral award
• Limitation period
• Filing and registration of arbitral awards

Read case analysis

mi

Court

TANZLII

The High Court of Tanzania (Commercial Division) has jurisdiction to recognize and enforce the arbitral award under section 73 of the Arbitration Act, CAP 15 of 2020, even if the seat of arbitration is Zanzibar, because the parties expressly chose the Arbitration Act, 2020 as the curial law and conducted the arbitration under its procedures. The seat designated in the contract was venue, not legal seat, and party autonomy prevails. The only ground for refusing enforcement is lack of substantive jurisdiction, which was not established. The preliminary objection is misconceived and dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction
• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Party autonomy
• Seat of arbitration
• Applicable law

Read case analysis

ZAWIYA T TRADERS LTD VS COCA COLA KWANZA LTD MISC

Court

TANZLII

The High Court has jurisdiction to recognize and enforce the domestic arbitral award, even though its pecuniary value fits within the jurisdiction of subordinate courts, because the High Court's jurisdiction is not ousted by the lower value. The arbitral award meets the statutory requirements for recognition and enforcement under section 83(2)(b) of the Arbitration Act, 2020, as the subject matter is arbitrable and enforcement is not contrary to any written law or norm.

Source excerpt

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Jurisdiction of courts
• Pecuniary jurisdiction
• Breach of contract
• Interest on awards

Read case analysis

vodacom tanzania plc vs shivacom tanzania ltd 2022 tzhccomd 276 14 september 2022

Court

TZHCCOMD

The High Court stayed a petition to recognize a third partial arbitral award because a related appeal over earlier awards was pending in the Court of Appeal.

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Stay of proceedings pending appeal
• Jurisdictional nexus between related proceedings
• Arbitration
• Recognition-and-enforcement-of-awards
• Stay-of-proceedings

Read case analysis

vodacom tanzania limited vs shivacom tanzania limited 2021 tzhccomd 3486 1 november 2021

Court

TZHCCOMD

The High Court stayed Vodacom’s petition to recognize a third partial arbitral award, finding it overlapped with a previously filed High Court challenge to the arbitration.

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Res sub judice
• Stay of proceedings
• Arbitration
• Recognition-and-enforcement-of-awards
• Stay-of-proceedings

Read case analysis

vodacom tanzania public company limited vs shivacom tanzania limited 2021 tzhccomd 3490 22 september 2021

Court

TZHCCOMD

The petition is not subjudice as it was filed before the related applications and the parties are not the same; therefore, the objection to stay proceedings fails.

Source excerpt

• Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
• Subjudice
• Stay of proceedings

Read case analysis