Esheria Tanzania Case Law
Sign in
Tanzania Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Tanzania Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Tanzania case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Tanzania decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Arbitration RULING VODACOM AND PLANETEL MISCELLANEOUS COMMERCIAL CAUSE NO

RULING VODACOM AND PLANETEL MISCELLANEOUS COMMERCIAL CAUSE NO

Court
TANZLII

The arbitral tribunal exceeded its powers by failing to comply with the court's binding findings and directives when reconsidering the remitted award, instead merely clarifying or justifying its previous reasoning and re-awarding reliefs previously found to be irregular. The tribunal misconstrued the nature of reconsideration under section 78 of the Arbitration Act, treating it as correction/clarification under section 64, and thus acted outside the scope of its revived jurisdiction. The reconsidered award is a nullity and must be set aside in whole.

Source excerpt

  • Remission of arbitral award
  • Serious irregularity
  • Public policy in arbitration
  • Functus officio
  • Scope of arbitral tribunal powers
  • Interest on commercial debts
Read case analysis
Arbitration csi electrical ltd vs capcon ltd 2023 tzhccomd 256 14 july 2023

csi electrical ltd vs capcon ltd 2023 tzhccomd 256 14 july 2023

Court
TZHCCOMD

The High Court set aside an arbitral award after finding unilateral communication between the arbitrator and one party, amounting to serious irregularity.

  • Setting aside arbitral award
  • Serious irregularity
  • Unilateral communication
  • Impartiality of arbitrator
  • Arbitration
  • Setting-aside-award
Read case analysis
Arbitration T BUILDING WORK LTD VS HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS LOAN BOARD MISC

T BUILDING WORK LTD VS HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENTS LOAN BOARD MISC

Court
TANZLII

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

  • Setting aside arbitral award
  • Serious irregularity
  • Arbitral procedure
  • Record of proceedings
  • Party autonomy
  • Remittance of award
Read case analysis
Arbitration dar es salaam international academy vs catic international engineering t ltd 2022 tzhccomd 263 31 august 2022

dar es salaam international academy vs catic international engineering t ltd 2022 tzhccomd 263 31 august 2022

Court
TZHCCOMD

The court found that the arbitral tribunal did not exceed its powers or fail to deal with all issues raised. The alleged errors did not constitute serious irregularities under section 75(2) of the Arbitration Act. The tribunal provided reasons for dismissing the counterclaim and acted within its jurisdiction. The petitioner's grounds were insufficient to set aside the award.

Source excerpt

  • Challenge to arbitral award
  • Serious irregularity
  • Liquidated damages
  • Mitigation of damages
  • Rectification costs
Read case analysis
Arbitration jubilee insurance co t limited vssalaaman health service 2021 tzhccomd 3355 19 august 2021

jubilee insurance co t limited vssalaaman health service 2021 tzhccomd 3355 19 august 2021

Court
TZHCCOMD

The arbitrator was properly appointed in accordance with the parties' agreement; arbitral proceedings complied with statutory requirements; no serious irregularity or misconduct was established; the award of general damages was within the arbitrator's discretion; the petitioner's grounds were merit-based and not valid for setting aside the award under sections 69 and 70 of the Arbitration Act, 2020.

Source excerpt

  • Setting aside arbitral award
  • Arbitrator appointment
  • Serious irregularity
  • Substantive jurisdiction
  • General damages
Read case analysis
Arbitration Ramani

Ramani

Court
TANZLII

The petitioner failed to establish any serious irregularity or breach of public policy by the arbitrator; the arbitral proceedings were conducted fairly, both parties were heard, and the award was within the arbitrator's jurisdiction. The court cannot revisit the merits or entertain new issues not raised before the arbitrator. There is no basis to set aside the award.

Source excerpt

  • Setting aside arbitral awards
  • Serious irregularity
  • Public policy in arbitration
  • Jurisdiction of arbitrator
  • Procurement contract variations
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Tanzania decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.