High Court stops Bank from enforcing 300bn/- award

FAUSTINE KAPAMA

THE High Court yesterday stayed the proceedings for enforcement of award by the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), requiring the Tanzania Electric Supply Company Limited (TANESCO) to pay Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Limited (SCBHK) over 330bn/-

That was after Judge Ama Munisi took into consideration submissions presented by Advocate Majura Magafu for TANESCO, who informed the High Court that his client, TANESCO, had already petitioned the Higher Chamber of ICSID Tribunal, seeking annulment of the award.

He argued that TANESCO had filed two applications in the ICSID, one for Annulment of the Award and the other for stay to enforce it. The advocate, thus, sought suspension of proceedings filed, pending determination of the said two applications before the ICSID.

Advocates Samah Salah, for SCBHK and Joseph Makandege, for Independent Power Tanzania Limited (IPTL) and Pan African Power Solution Limited (PAP), also added their weight to the prayer by the counsel for TANESCO, to quash the proceedings, until the international Tribunal decides the two applications.

Mr Makandege, being as sisted by Learned Advocates Melchisedeck Lutema, Augustine Kusalika, Joseph Sungwa, Kay Felician, James Yarah and Saada Kiveya, all for IPTL/ PAP, strongly submitted that it would be a futile exercise for the court to precede with the current enforcement proceedings by SCBHK in view of annulment cases filed by TANESCO and pending before the ICSID.

He, however, quickly pointed out that his clients (IPTL and PAP) reserved their rights to continue pursuing their pendings before the High Court, challenging the earlier enforcement proceedings initiated by SCBHK should TANESCO’s annulment cases in the ICSID fail.

Before the High Court, SCBHK has filed two applications, Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 687 of 2016, seeking registration and enforcement of the Award; and Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 745 of 2016, seeking impoundment of IPTL capacity charges payable by TANESCO and deposition of the same to the High Court pending hearing and final determination of their Enforce ment Proceeding.

On the other hand, IPTL and PAP have also filed the two applications in the High Court, namely, Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 801 of 2016, applying for leave to intervene in the bank’s applications; and Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 802 of 2016, seeking stay of SCBHK’s two applications.

In these two sets of applications, TANESCO is one of the respondents.