{"issue_text":"Whether the applicant lacked legal capacity to enter into the contract and arbitration agreement.","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Applicant is a creature of statute; applicant participated in arbitration; applicant uses the building."}
{"issue_text":"Whether the arbitral procedure was not in accordance with the agreement of the parties.","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Parties agreed on arbitrator and issues; applicant raised jurisdictional challenge for the first time in court."}
{"issue_text":"Whether the award dealt with a dispute not contemplated by or falling within the terms of submission to arbitration.","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Payment certificates issued without an architect."}
{"issue_text":"Whether the award is in conflict with the public policy of Zimbabwe.","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Award made in USD; applicant claims violation of SI 33/19 and SI 142/2019."}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
The applicant and the first respondent entered into a contract in November 2000 for the construction of a nine-storey building. Disputes arose and were referred to arbitration. The applicant now seeks to set aside the arbitral award on grounds of incapacity, procedural irregularity, and public policy, while the respondent seeks to register the award for enforcement.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases