During arbitration between a franchisor and franchisee, an interim interdict may be employed to enable the parties to continue to conduct their business arrangements until the dispute is settled. However, in certain circumstances the operation of the interdict may be suspended pending an appeal.
The January 2024 high court judgment in Cash Crusaders Franchising (Pty)
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) upheld an arbitration award that was challenged by the buyers of shares in a company, who argued that the arbitrator had ignored their suggestion to hold a separate hearing on one of the claims. The SCA found that the suggestion was not binding on the arbitrator, and that he
The Supreme Court of Appeal has reaffirmed some important principles about arbitrations. An arbitrator ‘has the right to be wrong’ on the merits of the case and being wrong does not mean that the arbitrator misconceived the nature of the enquiry. Secondly, an arbitrator only has the powers afforded to them in terms of the
An arbitration or similar adjudication clause, contained in an agreement that is found to have been induced by fraud, does not survive the avoidance of the agreement. That would be offensive to justice. The position can only change if the parties specifically make provision in their contract for a dispute regarding fraud, misrepresentation or concealment
An arbitrator’s notes do not form part of the record of arbitration proceedings, and the losing party, intent on a review, cannot compel the disclosure of the notes.
In Zamani Marketing and Management Consultants v HCI Invest 15 Holdco, the claimant instituted proceedings in terms of the Arbitration Act 1965 to review and set
The case of Khum MK Investments and Bie Joint Venture (Pty) Limited v Eskom Holdings Soc illustrates our courts’ reluctance to interfere with arbitration awards except in the limited circumstances set out in the Arbitration Act. The applicant must not only allege that the arbitrator’s decision was legally wrong. It must show that no reasonable
Section 8 of the Arbitration Act 1965 allows a court to extend the period allowed for arbitration in terms of an arbitration agreement if ‘undue hardship would otherwise be caused’. The Johannesburg High Court held that it would cause ‘undue hardship’ to refuse to extend a time-bar in circumstances where the events that caused the
The English commercial court set out the limited basis on which an arbitration award can be set aside when it is alleged that evidence of fraud that would have affected the decision only came to light after the award. The merits of an arbitration award are rarely reviewed. Public policy exceptions such as fraud can
An arbitration award does not create a new debt for purposes of prescription. Parties who wait more than one year to have an arbitration award made an order of court with a 30 year prescription period may find that, when they attempt to enforce the award, the underlying debt has prescribed. Parties should deal expressly
In late December 2017, Parliament enacted the long-awaited International Arbitration Act which brings about an overhaul of the international arbitration framework. The Act commenced on 20 December 2017.
The new Arbitration Act regulates international arbitration proceedings in South Africa and governs the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. The Act, which incorporates the Model Law on