{"issue_text":"Whether the appeal is competent given Article 9(4) of the Model Law prohibits appeals against interim measures","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"High Court granted interim interdict under Article 9; Article 9(4) states such decisions not subject to appeal"}
{"issue_text":"Whether the Supreme Court can review irregularities in High Court proceedings under section 25 of the Supreme Court Act","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"High Court failed to determine preliminary issues; Supreme Court has review jurisdiction under s 25"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The appellant and first respondent entered into a joint venture agreement for ecotourism development. After alleged breaches, the first respondent terminated the agreement and sought an interim interdict to stop hunting activities pending arbitration. The High Court granted the interdict under Article 9 of the UNCITRAL Model Law.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases