{"issue_text":"Whether the arbitral award should be set aside on grounds of being contrary to public policy","issue_type":"mixed","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Arbitrator's finding on prescription, applicant's contention of palpable inequity"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the applicant's founding affidavit was fatally defective due to unauthenticated company resolution","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Company resolution executed outside Zimbabwe not authenticated"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant sought to set aside an arbitral award granted by the second respondent arbitrator in favor of the first respondent City of Harare. The arbitrator had found the applicant's claim for damages had prescribed in June 2013, though the claim was only made in 2017. The applicant contended the award was contrary to public policy as it breached natural justice and conflicted with substantive law on prescription.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases