Arbitral AwardSetting AsidePublic PolicyNatural JusticeFunctus Officio
Tags
ArbitrationSetting Aside AwardCommercial Contract
legislation
Statutes Cited
Arbitration Act
Arbitration Act
Arbitration Act
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"What were the terms of reference for arbitration?","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Scope of arbitration agreed by parties"}
{"issue_text":"Whether or not the determination made by the Honourable Arbitrator on 14 September 2015 was a final award?","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Nature of the email ruling"}
{"issue_text":"Whether or not the Arbitrator was impartial in his approach vis-à-vis the award of 10 June 2016?","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Arbitrator's conduct and use of language"}
{"issue_text":"Is the subsequent award issued by the Arbitrator on 9 June 2016 purportedly quantifying the award consistent with public policy of Zimbabwe?","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Lack of opportunity to be heard on damages"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant, a manufacturer and distributor of fertilizers and agricultural inputs, entered into a contract growing agreement with the respondent for the 2011/2012 agricultural season. A dispute arose regarding a shortfall in repayments and the termination of the agreement, which was referred to arbitration. The arbitrator issued a ruling on 14 September 2015 finding the respondent was not in breach of contract. Subsequently, on 10 June 2016, the arbitrator issued a further award quantifying damages without giving the applicant an opportunity to respond to the respondent's claim for damages.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases