|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
An arbitral award may be challenged independently; filing differs from recognition and time runs from the award date.
* Arbitration — filing vs recognition: 'filing' (transmission to Court Registry) is distinct from 'recognition/registration' (judicial confirmation of enforceability). * Limitation — time to challenge: 28 days for lack of substantive jurisdiction or appeal by case stated (s.77(3)); 60 days for serious irregularity (Item 21, Part III, Second Schedule, Law of Limitation). * Procedure — a party may challenge an award independently without awaiting the other party's enforcement petition; challenges should be by separate petition or cross‑petition, not merely by answer to recognition petition. * Effect of recognition — a recognized award becomes a court decree and cannot later be set aside by the same court through fresh annulment proceedings.
|
Judgment |
21 February 2025 |
|
|
Document |
2 November 2024 |
|
|
Document |
4 September 2019 |
Independence and separability of the arbitration agreement - Whether having several defendants is a bar for any one of them to pray for an order of stay of proceedings in court if there is an agreement and an arbitration clause. - The court’s duty to consider the rights of the parties in terms of multiplicity of proceedings and costs when ordering stay of proceedings pending arbitration |
Judgment |
12 April 2019 |
|
Reported
|
Judgment |
30 June 2017 |
|
|
Judgment |
28 September 2016 |
|
Lack of arbitrator jurisdiction can amount to misconduct under s.16, but proving it requires a full hearing, not a preliminary objection.
* Arbitration – Jurisdiction – Whether arbitrator’s lack of jurisdiction amounts to misconduct or improper procurement under s.16 of the Arbitration Act; * Preliminary objection – When jurisdictional challenges require substantive hearing rather than disposal at preliminary stage; * Arbitration awards – Effect of adoption/registration as court decree and whether such awards remain open to setting aside.
|
Judgment |
18 March 2016 |
|
A registrar must file a presented arbitral award; courts cannot entertain limitation objections before registration.
* Arbitration law – filing and registration of arbitral awards – meaning of 'cause the award to be filed' – arbitrator may authorise another person to file award.
* Registrar’s duty – mandatory filing/registration on presentation – no power to refuse, delay or adjudicate objections before filing.
* Jurisdiction – High Court acquires jurisdiction over an award only after filing/registration; preliminary objections (e.g., time-bar) premature.
|
Judgment |
4 December 2015 |
|
|
Document |
20 December 2012 |
|
High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant stay of execution after a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeal is filed.
Arbitration award enforcement; stay of execution pending appeal; Court of Appeal Rules 2009 (rule 11(2), clause (c), rule 3); High Court jurisdiction; Order XXXIX rule 5 CPC; effect of filing Notice of Appeal.
|
Judgment |
6 September 2012 |
|
Reported
Advocates of Zanzibar lack automatic mainland audience rights; arbitrator’s jurisdiction depends on contract, arbitration law, and waiver.
* Civil procedure – Right of audience – Advocates of High Court of Zanzibar do not automatically have audience rights before the Court of Appeal on mainland; must be on mainland Roll or have special licence. * Arbitration – Jurisdiction – Arbitrator's jurisdiction founded on parties' Agreement to Refer (Clause 67) and Arbitration Ordinance; section 67 THA Act inapplicable. * Arbitration – Waiver/estoppel – Participation without timely protest may waive jurisdictional objections; timely objections preclude jurisdiction over later claims. * Remedies – Claims added later (e.g., devaluation compensation) falling outside procedural preconditions are non-justiciable by arbitrator. * Procedure – Notice of Affirmation citing wrong rule is incompetent.
|
Judgment |
18 August 2005 |
|
Court may grant interim injunctions before a main suit and against the government using inherent judicial powers.
Civil procedure – interim injunctions – jurisdiction to grant interlocutory injunctions before institution of main suit (Mareva-type orders) – inherent powers under s.2 Judicature Ordinance and s.95 CPC; Government proceedings – injunctions against the State/Attorney General – scope of proviso to Order XXXVII r.2 (GN. No. 376 of 1968) – government not immune where prima facie case and imminent injustice shown.
|
Judgment |
2 September 2003 |
Prerequisites for stay of proceedings pending arbitration under the repealed Arbitration Act |
Judgment |
30 September 2002 |
|
Reported
Irrevocability of the submission to arbitration clause (s. 4 of the repealed Arbitration Act). - The sanctity of the arbitration agreement. - Duty of the court where there is an arbitration agreement. |
Judgment |
19 September 2002 |
|
|
Document |
7 May 1992 |
|
Reported
Effect of arbitration clause on subsequent civil proceedings. - Steps to be taken to stay civil proceedings in court where there is an arbitration clause. |
Judgment |
1 January 1983 |