Canlink Trading (Pvt) Ltd (the applicant) applied for registration of an arbitral award against Powertel Communications (Pvt) Ltd (the respondent) in terms of Article 35(1) of the Arbitration Act [Chapter 7:15]. Prior to this application, the respondent had brought an application to set aside the arbitral award, which was heard before Deme J and dismissed. The respondent contended that they had appealed against the dismissal of the setting aside application and argued that registration should be suspended pending the Supreme Court's determination of the appeal. At the time of the hearing, no appeal had actually been filed at the Supreme Court despite the respondent's counsel's submissions to the contrary.
The application for registration of the arbitral award was granted in terms of the draft order.
Once an application to set aside an arbitral award has been dismissed, the award remains valid and enforceable and may be registered, notwithstanding a pending or intended appeal against the dismissal. An appeal does not automatically suspend the enforceability of an arbitral award unless specifically ordered. Registration of an arbitral award is a formal administrative process governed by specific statutory requirements set out in CF Holdings t/a Farm & City v Andrew Machaya SC 37/23, and defences to registration are limited to non-compliance with those formalities. The five requirements for registration are: (1) competent arbitrator; (2) award sounds in money; (3) award is extant and not set aside; (4) parties are litigants to the award; and (5) award is certified.
The court observed that although the respondent's counsel submitted that an appeal had been filed at the Supreme Court, no such appeal had actually been filed at the time of the hearing. The court also noted that Article 36(2) of the Arbitration Act permits adjournment of a decision on recognition and enforcement if a setting aside application is pending, but this provision is not applicable once the setting aside application has been determined and dismissed.
This case clarifies the procedural requirements for registration of arbitral awards in Zimbabwe and confirms that registration is a formal administrative process. It establishes that a pending appeal (or even an intention to appeal) against the dismissal of a setting aside application does not automatically suspend the registration or enforceability of an arbitral award unless a specific order to that effect is obtained. The judgment reinforces the finality and enforceability of arbitral awards once applications to set them aside have been dismissed, promoting efficiency in arbitration enforcement and discouraging dilatory tactics by unsuccessful parties.