Hii itakuwa ni hadithi ya bunuasi hivi huyo Kabudi yuko wapi??kwani yeye ndio alikuwa waziri wakati wa hii kesi ya waswidish anajibu gani sasa??mtafuteni taupe gumzo!. Ndege iyokamatwa Canada ilikuwa mpya na ilikuwa kwa sababu ya Sunlodge kilwa Magufuli walilipa haraka bila kuwakilisha Watanzania Canada ndege za Tanzania zimekamatwa mara mbili na watu tofauti hii sasa Holland ni mara ya tatu na ile ilikamatwa SASerikali ya awamu ya sita ya CCM ile ile imekuwa na upole tofauti na ilivyokuwa chini ya JPM.
Tujikumbushe jinsi serikali ya JPM ilivyocharuka na kugeuka mbogo aliyejeruhiwa kwa matukio ya kudaiwa :
Saturday, November 23, 2019
Ndege nyingine ya Tanzania yakamatwa Canada
Ndege nyingine ya Shirika la Ndege Tanzania (ATCL) aina ya Bombadier ambayo ilikuwa ikijiandaa kuja Tanzania imekamatwa nchini Canada, ambapo aliyefanya hivyo ni yuleyule (Hermanus Steyn, raia wa Afrika Kusini) ambaye aliikamata ndege kama hiyo nchini Afrika Kusini miezi michache iliyopita lakini Serikali ya Tanzania ikamshinda mahakamani.
Hayo yamesemwa leo, Jumamosi Novemba 23, 2019 na Waziri wa Mambo ya Nje ya Nchi na Ushirikiano wa Afrika Mashariki, Prof. Palamagamba Kabudi, wakati akihutubia baada ya Rais John Magufuli kuwaapisha mabalozi wateule watano watakaoiwakilisha Tanzania nchi mbalimbali ambapo hafla hiyo ya imefanyika Ikulu Chamwino Jijini Dodoma.
Mabalozi walioapishwa leo Ikulu Dodoma ni;
Profesa Kabudi amesema kuendelea kwa vitendo hivyo ni hujuma za mabeberu wasiofurahishwa na maendeleo nchini.
- Mhe. Mej. Jen. Mstaafu Asleim Bahati, Balozi wa Tanzania Misri
- Mhe. Jestas Nyamanga, Balozi nchini Ubelgijji
- Mhe. Mohammed Mtonga, Balozi wa Tanzania, UAE
- Mhe. Jilly Maleko, Balozi nchini Burundi
- Mhe. Ali Mwadini, Balozi nchini Saudi Arabia.
“Tulikwenda mahakamani tukamshinda (Afrika Kusini) akakata rufaa na wiki iliyopita tukamshinda tena, huyohuyo sasa amekimbilia Canada amekamata ndege ya Bombardier Q400 ambayo ilikuwa ifike nchini.
“Jambo linalosikitisha ndege zilizokuwa zinatoka Marekani aina ya Dreamliner mbili hazikukamatwa zimefika lakini kila ndege inapotakiwa kuondoka Canada tunashangaa hao matapeli wanajuaje na ndege zinakamatwa.” Amesema Profesa Kabudi.
Amesema Balozi wa Tanzania nchini Canada aliitwa nchini na kuelezwa jinsi nchi isivyofurahishwa na kukamatwa kwa ndege zake kila zinapokaribia kuja kuondoka nchini humo.
“Jana nimemuita Balozi wa Canada, nimeongea naye kinagaubaga na kumwambia, haturidhishwi na tumechukizwa na tabia inayoendelea ya ndege zetu kukamatwa kila zinapotaka kutoka Canada, Mheshimiwa rais tunafikiri kukushauri kuhusu suala la kununua ndege Canada, si wao pekee wanaotengeneza ndege, hata Brazil wanatengeneza.
“Wanasingizia hali ya hewa, wanasimamisha safari zake, kisha wanaikamata. Kule Afrika Kusini tulimshinda kesi ya msingi na rufaa sasa hivi amekimbilia Canada, tayari tumeshapata wanasheria kule Canada na taratibu zote za kutetea ndege yetu zimeanza.
“Hoja yetu kubwa ni kuwaeleza watu wa Canada kwamba amekenda kwenye mahakama za nje ameshindwa na sasa amekimbilia Canada. Sasa tumeelewa kuwa kila unapoleta maendeleo wapo mabeberu wa nje na wengine wa ndani wanaotuhujumu. Wanakesha wakiunguruma ili wairarue nchi hii,” amesema Prof. Kabudi.
Kushikiliwa kwa ndege hiyo kunarejesha kumbukumbu ya ndege nyingine ya Tanzania aina ya Bombardier Q400-8 iliyozuiwa nchini Canada mwaka 2017 kutokana na madai ya Sh87.3 bilioni zilizokuwa zikidaiwa na kampuni ya kikandarasi
Hakuna mahakama haya ni matawi ya CCMKwa mahakama zetu hapa, hata mtu kujitambulisha kuwa wewe ni jaji, ni kujitukana.
Sisi hatuna mahakama. Kuna idara ya ikulu inayoitwa mahakama ili kuwahadaa watu kuwa tuna mahakama.
Sunlodge
| description of the costs | TSHS | USD$ (at the ExchangeRate of (TZS1: 2,350/USD) |
| Tribunal’s Fees | 646,250,000 | 275,000.00 |
| cost of legal REPRESENTATION | ||
| State Attorneys | 1,108,000,000.00 | 471,489.36 |
| Administrative staffs | 582,500,000.00 | 247,872.34 |
| Other Civil Servants Costs | 458,000,000.00 | 194,893.62 |
| Witnesses Costs | 90,000,000.00 | 8,297.87 |
| Travelling costs | 199,757,498.08 | 85,003.19 |
| sub total | 2,438,257,498.08 | 1,282,556.38 |
| Cost of preparation of the application and application on interim measures | 379,700,000.00 | 161,574.47 |
| disbursement costs | ||
| Hyper linking of Documents | 2,500,000.00 | 1,063.83 |
| Printing and photocopy costs | 73,657,040.00 | 31,343.42 |
| Conference room costs | 328,000,000.00 | 139,574.47 |
| Courier costs/Postage costs | 5,000,000.00 | 2,127.66 |
| Material and supplies | 65,202,671.00 | 27,745.82 |
| sub total | 474,359,711.00 | 201,855.20 |
| GRAND TOTAL COSTS | 3,938,567,209.08 | 1,645,986.05 |
Kila siku tunaambiwa tuwe na mahakama huru, waendesha mashtaka huru, wanasheria wa serikali huru, bunge huru la kupitisha sheria za haki, mihimili ya dola huru yaani Bunge, Mahakama na dola / Executive rais asiwe mithili ya mfalme bali afuate sheria za haki asiwe mtu wa matamko, mtoa pesa zote, mjenga barabara ya kitongoji n..k CCM hawatuelewi wanataka kusifu, kuabudu na kutukuza uvunjajwi wa sheria, katiba, mikataba kisa amri toka juu.
Sasa mihimili yote ya dola la Tanzania yaani Bunge, Mahakama na taasisi ya urais haviaminiki ndani ya nchi na kimataifa .
Bunge la wabunge ambao hawajachaguliwa na wananchi 2020, majaji wanaoonekana ni makada wa CCM, serikali inayofuata sera za kibaguzi kubagua vyama vingine vilivyosajiliwa kwa mujibu wa sheria na kutambulika kikatiba vinazuiliwa kufanya shughuli za siasa ....... wananchi kubomolewa nyumba Kimara DSM bila fidia, Rugemalila Singh plea & bargaining , shamba la miwa Bagamoyo, Stein mkulima wa Afrika ya Kusini, uchafuzi wa uchaguzi 2020, ... listi ni ndefu
Victory Attorneys & Consultants
https://victoryattorneys.co.tz › plea-...
Plea Bargaining Arrangement: The Inevitable Law In Tanzania
Plea bargaining refers to the process whereby an accused and public prosecutor reach a mutual agreement without going through long court
UHAMIAJI - TUNACHUNGUZA URAIA WA ERICK KABENDERA
Endelea kutoa elimu
Walimpeleka Kidando wakadhani watashinda kesi?Procedures
Selection and Appointment of Tribunal Members - ICSID Convention Arbitration (2006 Rules)
Once the number of arbitrators and the method of their appointment have been determined, the arbitrator(s) may be appointed. If the parties are unable to appoint all members of the Tribunal pursuant to the established method of appointment, the ICSID default mechanism may apply.
Parties are not required to select arbitrators from the ICSID Panel of Arbitrators, although they are welcome to do so.
The Convention sets forth certain requirements regarding the nationality and qualifications of appointees to ICSID Tribunals, but the parties are otherwise free to choose whomever they wish.
Requirements for Appointees
Nationality Requirement
A majority of arbitrators on a Tribunal must be nationals of States other than the State party to the dispute and the State whose national is a party to the dispute (Article 39 of the Convention and Arbitration Rule 1(3)).
The nationality rule does not apply if the sole arbitrator or each individual member of the Tribunal is appointed by agreement of the parties.
Where a Tribunal consists of three members, an arbitrator cannot have the same nationality as either party unless both parties agree to that appointment.
In practice, this means that:
Arbitrator Qualifications
- A sole arbitrator may not have the same nationality as either party unless both parties agree.
- If each party has appointed a person of an excluded nationality (as approved by the other party), the parties must also agree on the appointment of the President of the Tribunal.
All ICSID arbitrators must be persons:
Additional Considerations for Selecting Arbitrators
- of high moral character;
- with recognized competence in the fields of law, commerce, industry or finance; and
- who may be relied upon to exercise independent judgment (Article 14(1) and Article 40(2) of the Convention).
In addition to the requirements established by the Convention, there are several practical considerations that parties should reflect upon when selecting an arbitrator. Although these may vary depending on the specific characteristics and demands of each case, the following factors are generally among the most important:
Appointing an Arbitrator
- Knowledge of the relevant law(s)
- Absence of conflict of interest
- Experience as an arbitrator
- Language proficiency
- Availability of arbitrator/manageability of current caseload
- Timeliness
- Cohesiveness of the Tribunal
- Other areas of expertise
The parties should provide ICSID with the following information in respect of an arbitrator appointment:
Once an arbitrator is appointed, ICSID seeks the appointee’s acceptance of the nomination. The Secretary-General then notifies the parties of the appointee’s acceptance or refusal.
- complete name;
- nationality;
- contact information (i.e., mailing address, telephone and fax numbers, email); and
- a current curriculum vitae.
If an arbitrator refuses or fails to accept the appointment within 15 days, ICSID will invite the appointing party to nominate another arbitrator.
Default Mechanism for Appointing an Arbitrator
If the parties are unable to appoint all members of the Tribunal within 90 days of the registration of the request for arbitration, either party may request that the Chairman of the ICSID Administrative Council appoint the arbitrator(s) not yet appointed (Article 38 of the ICSID Convention).
When a party makes such a request in respect of the Sole Arbitrator or President of the Tribunal, ICSID first conducts a ballot procedure (see ICSID's sample ballot):
A successful ballot is considered an appointment by agreement of the parties under the established method of constituting the Tribunal.
- ICSID provides the parties with a ballot form containing the names of several candidates, who may or may not be members of the ICSID Panel of Arbitrators.
- Each party is given a short time limit to return its completed ballot form, indicating the candidates it accepts or rejects.
- A party is not required to share its ballot with the other party.
- If the parties agree on a candidate from the ballot, that person will be deemed to have been appointed by agreement of the parties.
- If the parties agree on more than one proposed candidate, ICSID selects one of them and informs the parties of the selection.
If there is no agreement by the parties, ICSID names a person from the Panel of Arbitrators, pursuant to Article 38 of the Convention. Before the person is appointed, the parties are given the opportunity to raise any circumstance showing that the person lacks the required qualities under the ICSID Convention (Article 14(1) of the Convention).
Until the process is completed, the parties may appoint missing arbitrators under the established method of constitution or by agreement.
The Centre endeavors to complete the appointment process within 30 days of the request for appointment.
READ MORE ; Source : Selection and Appointment of Tribunal Members - ICSID Convention Arbitration (2006 Rules) | ICSID
Aibu na fedheha nyingine kwa the GangHUKUMU NZITO IMETOKA LEO TAREHE 5 DECEMBER 2022.
TAMATI YA NUKUU YA HUKUMU KUHUSU CAG ALIYE OFISINI SASA NA ALIYENGOLEWA PIA RAIS ALIVUNJA KATIBA
IN THE COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC (MAIN REGISTRY) AT DAR ES SALAAM (CORAM: MASOUD, KAKOLAKI, And MASABO, JJJ.)
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CAUSE NO. 8 OF 2022 IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA OF 1977 AS AMENDEDAND IN THE MATTER OF THE PUBLIC AUDIT ACT No. 11 OF 2018 AND IN THE MATTER OF BASIC RIGHTS AND DUTIES ENFORCEMENT ACT, CAP. 3 R.E 2002 AND IN THE MATTER OF A PETITION TO CHALLENGE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 6(1) OF THE PUBLIC AUDIT ACT No. 11 of 2018 AS BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND IN THE MATTER OF A PETITION TO CHALLENGE THE ACT OF THE 1st RESPONDENT TO REMOVE THE 4th RESPONDENT FROM THE POSITION OF THE CONTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL AND REPLACE HIM WITH THE 3rd RESPONDENT EVEN THOUGH THE 4th RESPONDENT HAD NEITHER REACHED 60YEARS OF AGE NOR 65 YEARS OF AGE AS BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL BETWEEN
ZITTO ZUBERI KABWE.....................................PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA..................... 1st RESPONDENT
THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL ......... 2nd RESPONDENT
CHARLES KICHERE ........... 3rd RESPONDENT
PROF. MUSSA JUMA ASSAD .......4th RESPONDENT
.... We were not told a legitimate purpose that the provision and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office save.
We were similarly not told how article 30(2) would save the impugned provision and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office which are violative of article 144 (1) of the Constitution.
We nonetheless do not see any lawful object which was intended to be achieved by the provision, other than introducing a criterion of ensuring removal of the CAG from the office on expiry of the fixed term of five years contrary to the provision of article 144 and the security of tenure of the CAG guaranteed under the Constitution.
In the light of what we have discussed with regard to the saving provision of article 30(2) of the Constitution, we are satisfied and we so hold that neither section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act nor the act of the removal of the fourth respondent from the office is saved by and falls within the purview of article 30 (2) of the Constitution.
When all is said and done, we considered the reliefs sought by the petitioner in the light of the foregoing findings and conclusions.
Since we have found section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office by the first respondent to be unconstitutional for violating article 144(1) of the Constitution, we are inclined to make appropriate declarations to that effect.
As to the appointment of the third respondent into the office, we are satisfied that we cannot in the circumstances hold that the appointment was unconstitutional for reasons very well stated herein above, which would also cater for our resolve to decline to hold that the fourth respondent is the substantive holder of the office of the CAG.
In the upshot of the foregoing reasons and findings, the petition fails in the issue of the appointment of the third respondent in which case we decline to hold ....
the appointment of the third respondent is unconstitutional, and we in the same way decline to hold that the fourth respondent is a substantive holder of the office of the CAG.
It also fails in other issues implied from the reliefs which we did not expressly mention here. However, the petition is allowed in respect of unconstitutionality of the provision of section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act and the unconstitutionality of the removal of the fourth respondent from the office of the CAG pursuant to section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act before attaining the age of sixty five years.
We so hold because the provision of section 6(1) and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office are all violative of article 144 (1) of the Constitution.
Consequently, the provision of section 6 (1) of the Public Audit Act, No. 11 of 2008 is in terms of article 64 (5) of the Constitution herein declared null and void and is hereby struck out forthwith from the Public Audit Act, No. 11 of 2008.
We make no order as to costs as the petition was conducted as a public interest litigation.It is so ordered.DATED and DELIVERED at Dar es Salaam this 5th day of December, 2022
Signed : B.S Masoud
Judge
Signed : J.L Masabo
Judge
Signed : E.E Kakolaki
Judge
READ FULL JUDGEMENT :
Source : Zitto Zuberi Kabwe vs the President of the United Republic of Tanzania & Others (Misc. Cause 8 of 2022) [2022] TZHC 14947 (05 December 2022); | Tanzlii
Hapa naona wanafaidi ni wale wanaopata perdiem kwani wanajua kabisa kesi kama hizi hawawezi kushinda lakini hawaishauri serikali kusuluhisha wanataka kupata safari na malipo.Mzalendo yuko wapi kwenye ofisi ya mwanasheria mkuuSoma hukumu tribunal ya kimataifa
.The Parties
1.
The Claimants are (i) Sunlodges Ltd, a company incorporated under the laws of the territory of the British Virgin Islands ("Sunlodges BVI"); and (ii) Sunlodges (T) Limited ("Sunlodges Tanzania"), a company incorporated under the laws of Tanzania (together, the "Claimants").
2.
The Claimants are represented in this arbitration by:
Mr Matthew Coleman
Mr Thomas Innes
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
5 Aldermanbury Square
London EC2V 7HR
United Kingdom
3.
The Respondent in this arbitration is the United Republic of Tanzania ("Tanzania" or the "Respondent").
4.
The Respondent is represented in this arbitration by:
Dr Clement Mashamba, Solicitor General
Mr Gabriel Malata, Deputy Solicitor General
Mr George Mandepo, Acting Director of Arbitration
Mr Vicent Tangoh, Acting Assistant Director of International Arbitration
Mr Michael Luena, Director of Legal Service
Ms Neisha Shao, State Attorney
Ms Consesa Kahendaguza, State Attorney
Ms Rehema Mtulya, State Attorney
P.O. Box 17554
Dar es Salaam
United Republic of Tanzania
534.
The Respondent has provided the following summary of its costs and expenses:952
description of the costs TSHS USD$ (at the ExchangeRate of (TZS1: 2,350/USD) Tribunal’s Fees 646,250,000 275,000.00 cost of legal REPRESENTATION State Attorneys 1,108,000,000.00 471,489.36 Administrative staffs 582,500,000.00 247,872.34 Other Civil Servants Costs 458,000,000.00 194,893.62 Witnesses Costs 90,000,000.00 8,297.87 Travelling costs 199,757,498.08 85,003.19 sub total 2,438,257,498.08 1,282,556.38 Cost of preparation of the application and application on interim measures 379,700,000.00 161,574.47 disbursement costs Hyper linking of Documents 2,500,000.00 1,063.83 Printing and photocopy costs 73,657,040.00 31,343.42 Conference room costs 328,000,000.00 139,574.47 Courier costs/Postage costs 5,000,000.00 2,127.66 Material and supplies 65,202,671.00 27,745.82 sub total 474,359,711.00 201,855.20 GRAND TOTAL COSTS 3,938,567,209.08 1,645,986.05
535.
According to the Respondent, the Tribunal .......
XV. THE TRIBUNAL’S DECISION
553.
For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal finds, declares and awards as follows:
(a) The Respondent’s preliminary objections are dismissed;
(b) The Claimants’ claim that the Respondent has unlawfully expropriated the Claimants’ investments is upheld;
(c) Sunlodges BVI is awarded compensation for the Respondent’s breach of its obligations under the Italy-Tanzania Bilateral Investment Treaty in the amount of USD 8,919,842.45, with interest at 7% per annum, compounded annually from 5 September 2011 until full payment of the award. This amount is payable within 60 days of the notification of this award;
(d) Sunlodges Tanzania is awarded compensation for the Respondent’s breach of its obligations under the Italy-Tanzania Bilateral Investment Treaty in the amount of USD 2,337,162, with interest at 7% per annum, compounded annually from 5 September 2011 until full payment of the award. This amount is payable within 60 days of the notification of this award;
(e) The Respondent’s counterclaims are dismissed;
(f) The Respondent is ordered to bear the costs of arbitration;
(g) The Respondent is ordered to reimburse (i) USD 263,117.94 to the Claimants for the costs met from the Claimants’ share of the deposit; and (ii) USD 4,863.60 for the fees paid directly by the Claimants to the PCA for the designation of an appointing authority and to the appointing authority. These amounts are payable within 60 days of the notification of this award;
(h) The Respondent is ordered to pay to the Claimants USD 432,185, plus a success fee of 7% of the total compensation, in compensation of their legal costs within 60 days of notification of this award, together with simple interest thereon at the rate of 7 % from the 61st day after the date of the notification of this award until the date of full and final payment; and
(i) All other requests for relief are dismissed.
READ MORE IN FULL : Source :
Hapa naona wanafaidi ni wale wanaopata perdiem kwani wanajua kabisa kesi kama hizi hawawezi kushinda lakini hawaishauri serikali kusuluhisha wanataka kupata safari na malipo 3,938,567,209.08 . Mzalendo yuko wapi kwenye ofisi ya mwanasheria mkuu
Sunlodge ilichekesha sana mawakili waserikali walichekesha mahakama ya kimataifa ilikuwa ni kituko.Hawawezi kuweka pingamizi tu bila kuwa na concrete sababu ya pingamizi ukisoma hayo mabishano unaweza kucheka na kutoa machozi at the same time kweli Tanzania kuna shida kumbwa ni muhimu kujielimisha na kutumia hekima sio kumshutumu mtu anaetoa elimu bure kama LisuNi kweli jedwali hilo la gharama za kuendesha kesi kupinga madai ya mwekezaji, serikali ina tumia mamilioni kupeleka nje maofisa wake kama mawakili wa serikali, wanasheria wake, mashahidi , huduma za ma secretary, kutoa photocopy n.k
Na hapo tunapata picha nzima halisi kubwa za maamuzi ya kukurupuka yanavyoitafuna bajeti ya serikali.
Hii ni hatari sana. Nashauri wauze Ndege zote kwani zitaishia kukamatwa
Atoa mfano wa ndege ya airbus kukamatwa Uholanzi baada ya baraza la usuluhishi la kimataifa kuona mwekezaji alipwe fidia kwa mkataba uliovunjwa na serikali.
Jopo la waamuzi huwa na watu watatu, mmoja huteuliwa na serikali/mdaiwa yaani Tanzania, mjumbe wa pili huteuliwa na mwekezaji na wa tatu huteuliwa kwa makubaliano baina ya serikali na mwekezaji na huyu huwa ndiyo mwenyekiti wa tribunal anabainisha Tundu Lissu.
Tundu Lissu anazidi kutuelimisha kuwa wawekezaji huweka sharti kuwa kukitokea mgogoro basi waende kwenye hii tribunal / baraza la kimataifa kupata suluhisho. Maana wawekezaji wanafahamu kuwa mahakama zetu na majaji wake hawapo huru.
Tanzania imesaini mikataba na nchi nyingi ambazo ni wadau wa maendeleo kuwa kukitokea kutoelewana baina ya wawekezaji toka Mataifa hayo na Tanzania basi utatuzi utatafutwa katika Baraza hilo la kimataifa la biashara / uwekezaji kupata suluhu au kulipwa fidia.
Hivyo kelele kuwa inakuwaje ndege zetu zinakamatwa kiholela siyo za kweli. Maana wakati wa kuingia mkataba na wawekezaji mambo yote huwekwa hadharani na pia Tanzania imesaini mikataba ya maridhiano ya kimataifa kuwa mchakato gani ufuatwe kukitokea kadhia kama hii ya mwekezaji wa shamba la miwa Bagamoyo kugeukwa dakika ya mwisho baada ya mkataba kuwekwa.
Tundu Lissu anaongeza kuwa maamuzi ya Tribunal hii ya usuluhishi yanatambulika kama maamuzi ya mahakama yoyote ulimwengu na Tanzania ikiridhia hivyo ili kukazia hukumu ya baraza hilo, basi Mali za mdaiwa zinaweza kukamatwa kokote kule kulipo nchi zilizoafikia mikataba hii ya kimataifa.
Tundu Lissu baada ya kuweka sawa nini kimepelekea ndege za serikali yaani airbus a220-300 kukamatwa anasema kuwa ....
View attachment 2435846
icsid.worldbank.org
https://icsid.worldbank.org › about
About ICSID - World Bank
ICSID is the world's leading institution devoted to international investment dispute settlement. It has extensive experience in this field
Nimepitia maelezo ya huo mgogoro kwenye link unabaki unajiuliza hawa watu wanashindwa vipi kwenye kesi kama hizi.Soma hukumu tribunal ya kimataifa
.The Parties
1.
The Claimants are (i) Sunlodges Ltd, a company incorporated under the laws of the territory of the British Virgin Islands ("Sunlodges BVI"); and (ii) Sunlodges (T) Limited ("Sunlodges Tanzania"), a company incorporated under the laws of Tanzania (together, the "Claimants").
2.
The Claimants are represented in this arbitration by:
Mr Matthew Coleman
Mr Thomas Innes
Steptoe & Johnson LLP
5 Aldermanbury Square
London EC2V 7HR
United Kingdom
3.
The Respondent in this arbitration is the United Republic of Tanzania ("Tanzania" or the "Respondent").
4.
The Respondent is represented in this arbitration by:
Dr Clement Mashamba, Solicitor General
Mr Gabriel Malata, Deputy Solicitor General
Mr George Mandepo, Acting Director of Arbitration
Mr Vicent Tangoh, Acting Assistant Director of International Arbitration
Mr Michael Luena, Director of Legal Service
Ms Neisha Shao, State Attorney
Ms Consesa Kahendaguza, State Attorney
Ms Rehema Mtulya, State Attorney
P.O. Box 17554
Dar es Salaam
United Republic of Tanzania
534.
The Respondent has provided the following summary of its costs and expenses:952
description of the costs TSHS USD$ (at the ExchangeRate of (TZS1: 2,350/USD) Tribunal’s Fees 646,250,000 275,000.00 cost of legal REPRESENTATION State Attorneys 1,108,000,000.00 471,489.36 Administrative staffs 582,500,000.00 247,872.34 Other Civil Servants Costs 458,000,000.00 194,893.62 Witnesses Costs 90,000,000.00 8,297.87 Travelling costs 199,757,498.08 85,003.19 sub total 2,438,257,498.08 1,282,556.38 Cost of preparation of the application and application on interim measures 379,700,000.00 161,574.47 disbursement costs Hyper linking of Documents 2,500,000.00 1,063.83 Printing and photocopy costs 73,657,040.00 31,343.42 Conference room costs 328,000,000.00 139,574.47 Courier costs/Postage costs 5,000,000.00 2,127.66 Material and supplies 65,202,671.00 27,745.82 sub total 474,359,711.00 201,855.20 GRAND TOTAL COSTS 3,938,567,209.08 1,645,986.05
535.
According to the Respondent, the Tribunal .......
XV. THE TRIBUNAL’S DECISION
553.
For the reasons set out above, the Tribunal finds, declares and awards as follows:
(a) The Respondent’s preliminary objections are dismissed;
(b) The Claimants’ claim that the Respondent has unlawfully expropriated the Claimants’ investments is upheld;
(c) Sunlodges BVI is awarded compensation for the Respondent’s breach of its obligations under the Italy-Tanzania Bilateral Investment Treaty in the amount of USD 8,919,842.45, with interest at 7% per annum, compounded annually from 5 September 2011 until full payment of the award. This amount is payable within 60 days of the notification of this award;
(d) Sunlodges Tanzania is awarded compensation for the Respondent’s breach of its obligations under the Italy-Tanzania Bilateral Investment Treaty in the amount of USD 2,337,162, with interest at 7% per annum, compounded annually from 5 September 2011 until full payment of the award. This amount is payable within 60 days of the notification of this award;
(e) The Respondent’s counterclaims are dismissed;
(f) The Respondent is ordered to bear the costs of arbitration;
(g) The Respondent is ordered to reimburse (i) USD 263,117.94 to the Claimants for the costs met from the Claimants’ share of the deposit; and (ii) USD 4,863.60 for the fees paid directly by the Claimants to the PCA for the designation of an appointing authority and to the appointing authority. These amounts are payable within 60 days of the notification of this award;
(h) The Respondent is ordered to pay to the Claimants USD 432,185, plus a success fee of 7% of the total compensation, in compensation of their legal costs within 60 days of notification of this award, together with simple interest thereon at the rate of 7 % from the 61st day after the date of the notification of this award until the date of full and final payment; and
(i) All other requests for relief are dismissed.
READ MORE IN FULL : Source :
Nenda kasome BIT ya Tanzania na Italy alafu utelewa vizuri kwa nini alishinda na akakamata ndege mpya Magufuli akamlipa bila kuwajulisha WatanzaniaNimepitia maelezo ya huo mgogoro kwenye link unabaki unajiuliza hawa watu wanashindwa vipi kwenye kesi kama hizi.
Kwanza kampuni imesajiliwa Virgin Ireland sio Italy, mmliki ndio raia wa Italy; I don’t think that’s how BITs work.
Shamba kwa miaka 11 alijaendelezwa toka 2000 mpaka 2011.
Unapoomba kubadili matumizi ya eneo la serikali kuna kukubaliwa na kunyimwa (in contract terms counter offer, nullifies the original offer) hapo ukinyimwa kibali sio breach.
Eneo ni tajiri kwa resources za cement, wewe umelikalia tu kwa miaka 11 bila ya kuliendeleza, mpaka wananchi wamelivamia. Ametokea mwekezaji (Dangote) utaki kuliachia raisi ana mamlaka ya kubadili land usage na ndie aliefuta kibali fact ambayo aijatajwa wala sheria husika.
Mwekezaji amelinunua eneo kwa $145,000 madai yake mengine amejenga fence ya umeme na airstrip (ambayo most likely ni ya udongo).
Halafu huyo mtu ana zawadiwa $9.5 million, tena yeye alitaka apewe $35 million, kwa value ya damages zipi ata kama alistahili compensation sio hizo.
Dah hawa watu inabidi waanze kusomesha business lawyers nje ya nchi kuanzia bachelor, yaani unasoma vitu mpaka huruma.
Kampuni imesajiliwa kama ‘private limited company’ (Ltd), maana yake ni separate entity from its owners kwa maana hiyo aijalishi wamiliki ni raia wa wapi. Na kwakuwa kampuni imesajiliwa Virgin Ireland its subject to that nation BIT only, with Tanzania kama ipo.Nenda kasome BIT ya Tanzania na Italy alafu utelewa vizuri kwa nini alishinda na akakamata ndege mpya Magufuli akamlipa bila kuwajulisha Watanzania