Back to top
Zalari has raised $2 million USD in a founding round led by Nyamaropa Technologies
Harare High Court

Edmore Taperesu v International Export Trading Company and Catherine Chitiyo

HH 509-18

Case Details

Court
Harare High Court
Date
4 September 2018
Citation
HH 509-18
Neutral Citation
[2018] ZWHH 509
Outcome
unknown
Case Type
Application

Bench

Presiding
MANGOTA J
Full Bench
MANGOTA J
Areas of Law
Arbitration LawCommercial LawContract Law
Keywords
arbitral awardpublic policyarbitrator biascontract breachmaize delivery
Tags
arbitrationcontract disputemaize farmingcommercial arbitration
legislation
Statutes Cited
  • Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15]
  • Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15]
  • Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15]
ai analysis
Case Summary

Key Issues

  • {"issue_text":"Whether the arbitrator was incapable of impartial and independent conduct","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Arbitrator's partner is director of insurer; applicant excluded temporarily from proceedings"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the dispute was capable of settlement by arbitration","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Contract contained arbitration clause; dispute over maize delivery"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the arbitral award conflicts with public policy of Zimbabwe","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Temporary exclusion from hearing; alleged procedural irregularities"}
  • {"issue_text":"Whether the arbitrator treated parties unequally","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Different treatment regarding postponements and document filing"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case

Background

The applicant entered into a maize growing contract with the first respondent in 2013, whereby he received inputs and cash worth $147,627.44 to grow and deliver 650 metric tonnes of maize by 31 July 2014. He delivered only 108.834 tonnes, leading to a dispute over $211,054.74 claimed for undelivered maize. The dispute was referred to arbitration before the second respondent, who ruled in favor of the first respondent. The applicant now seeks to set aside the arbitral award.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases
Open in Zalari →