An account was opened by the Defendant at the Credit Communautaire d’Afrique S.A. Availing himself of the fact that he had not been given access to bank account statements which, he said, led to his bankruptcy, Mr. Kamga enlisted the services of André Youbi, an individual claiming to be a private Arbitration judge, who produced the arbitration award which is the subject of the present proceedings. Mr. Youbi ruled in favor of Mr. Kamga, ordering the Credit Communautaire d’Afrique S. to pay 82,000,000 FCFA to him in pecuniary damages. C.C.A. appealed this decision.
Application for the annulment of the award was granted. The arbitration agreement between the appellant and Kamga does not appear to be any evidence provided that it exists.
The Appellant and Responded signed an accommodation and representation agreement. KHALIFA’s alleged breach of the non-compete obligation, its non-payment of the debt owed to SOCOMAR, and unilateral termination of the accommodation contract, led the Appellant to seek and obtain an order for payment. Khalifa opposed the order, and the Tribunal ultimately ruled in favor of Khalifa. SOCOMAR appealed this decision.
Prodicom reached an agreement with SDBC. Dispute arose. SDBC sought an order from GICAM compelling Prodicom to return the SDBC goods stored in its warehouses. It also sought money kept in a joint escrow account. The Arbitral Tribunal ruled in favor of SDBC. Prodicom appealed the decision.
A contract for the transport of petroleum products was concluded between GAMMA SARL and Mobil Oil Chad SA. GAMMA SARL accused its contractual partner of having breached its contractual obligations, and seized an ad hoc arbitral tribunal, which ordered Mobil Oil Chad to pay damages. An appeal has been made against this decision.
The Appellant’s request for annulment was inadmissible.
Pamol Plantation and Mr. Noubissi signed an MOU. Following the non-execution of the said MOU by Mr. Noubissi, Pamol Plantation solicited and obtained an order for payment of FCFA 112,000,000. Mr. Noubissi applied and obtained an award in his favor. Pamol has appealed this award.
Arbitral award was annulled. The MOU indicated that they elected to submit disputes to the Indian courts in Mundemba. Recourse to arbitration must be agreed upon by both parties to a dispute. Pamol's failure to respond to Mr. Noubissi’s proposed arbitration indicates a lack of desire on its part to take part in this process. The fact that it did not consent to it, renders the award invalid.
On the 11th of April 2005, an arbitral award was passed between the parties. The Tribunal Arbitrator has made a material mistake. The appellant CIGAM is asking the cancellation of the arbitral award of the 11thof April and the 22nd of June 2005 because it had an irregular proceeding because of the absence of the co-arbitrator; needs to be declared the existence of the non-respect of the principle of contradiction and also the infringement of the international public order and absence of motivation of the award.
The Appellant’s request for annulment of the two awards was admissible. The recourse was inadmissible cause of lack of authority of the judged thing. CIGAM was to bear the costs.