{"issue_text":"Whether the dispute ought to be referred to arbitration in terms of clause 21 of the Joint Venture Agreement","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Existence of arbitration clause, dispute arising from cancellation"}
{"issue_text":"Whether there were any moneys paid to defendant by plaintiff in terms of the Joint Venture Agreement and if so how much","issue_type":"factual","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Payment claims and denials"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the Joint Venture Agreement is void ab initio for non-compliance with planning laws","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Section 39 of Regional Town and Country Planning Act"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Plaintiff sued defendant for refund of US$410 000 paid under a cancelled Joint Venture Agreement. Defendant raised a special plea that the dispute must be referred to arbitration in terms of clause 21 of the agreement.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases