The City of Harare, Zimbabwe, is facing a significant financial challenge. The municipality is struggling to pay its debts, and it has been unable to settle a US$468,000 debt with a bitumen products supplier. The supplier, however, had quoted the amount in US dollars, and the City of Harare is now facing a legal battle to pay the debt in US dollars. The City of Harare argued that it should settle the debt using a 1:1 United States to local currency conversion rate. This means that for every US dollar paid, the municipality would be able to exchange it for an equivalent amount of Zimbabwean dollars.

The invoice was then rejected by the council. Furbank then filed a claim for breach of contract and sought damages for the supply of bitumen products. Furbank argued that the council had failed to pay the invoice within the stipulated time frame. Furbank also argued that the council had failed to provide a valid reason for rejecting the invoice.

The summary provided argues that an arbitrator’s decision is valid and should be upheld. The argument hinges on several key points:

1. **Consistency with the law:** The arbitrator’s decision aligns with established legal principles and precedents. 2.