Tanzanian courts approach contractual disputes with strict and disciplined interpretation, emphasising clarity of obligations, mutuality of intent, and consistency between language and conduct.
Africa's mining sector remains one of the continent's most compelling investment frontiers. Valued at $508 billion in 2024 and projected to reach $848 billion by 2031, capital continues to flow into a continent holding 79 percent of global platinum reserves, 62 percent of chromium, and 55 percent of cobalt.
Yet investor-state arbitrations in Africa have surged 167 percent since 2016. Increasingly, the defining risk is not geology or commodity prices — it is how disputes are resolved across legal systems.
This shift is nowhere more evident than in how courts interpret commercial agreements. Tanzanian courts approach contractual disputes with strict and disciplined interpretation, emphasising clarity of obligations, mutuality of intent, and consistency between language and conduct.
Where contracts are ambiguous, courts favour substance over creative interpretation.
The stakes are significant. For investors operating where Tanzania's mining sector generates $3.6 billion in mineral exports and contributes 10.1 percent of GDP, what is written matters profoundly.
Courts have proven time and again that boilerplate templates may save $1,000 in legal fees but cost millions in damages.
Non-disclosure and non-compete obligations are recognised under Tanzanian law where they protect proprietary information or strategic positioning. However, recognition does not mean automatic enforcement.
Courts examine proportionality, duration, scope, and commercial context. Well-drafted NDAs are enforceable; overreaching ones are not.
Beyond contract interpretation, the approach to damages reveals another critical dimension. Tanzanian courts do not award damages based on speculation.
Claims must be specifically pleaded, clearly proven, and causally linked to the breach.
The judiciary distinguishes rigorously between actual loss, foreseeable loss, and speculative opportunity cost.
This discipline has direct parallels internationally. Analysis of 118 investor-state cases shows that in 44 percent of disputes, claimed amounts exceeded awards by a factor of ten. Courts expect detailed proof — financial records, expert testimony, demonstrable causal chains — not aspirational valuations.
As African mining projects become increasingly international, disputes often unfold across multiple jurisdictions.
Tanzanian courts assert jurisdiction where contracts are governed by Tanzanian law, obligations are performed in Tanzania, or disputes materially affect Tanzanian assets.
In 2017, Tanzania adopted legislation requiring natural resources disputes to be heard by local courts. For investors assuming offshore forums will dominate, this represents a fundamental miscalculation.
Yet securing a favourable judgment is only half the challenge. A judgment is only as effective as its enforceability. Analysis shows 78 percent of mining arbitrations lead to awards, yet median awards represent just 25 percent of claimed damages.
Recent West African disputes illustrate these realities — Barrick Gold, GoviEx, and Sarama Resources launched ICSID arbitrations after asset seizures, with Mali seizing $245 million in gold stocks from Barrick. In the end, an amicable settlement proved to be the viable legal strategy where favourable awards mean little without enforcement mechanisms.
These challenges underscore Tanzania's comparative advantage. While Niger's exploration spending dropped 90 percent following coups, Mali's fell 50 percent, and Burkina Faso's declined 69 percent, Tanzania demonstrates consistent performance.
Tanzania achieved 90 percent of its Sh1 trillion revenue target by June 2025, with mining GDP growing 17 percent in Q1 2025.
The sector created 19,356 jobs with 97 percent going to Tanzanians. Mining's GDP contribution increased from 7.2 percent in 2021 to 10.1 percent in 2025, surpassing the 2026 target ahead of schedule.
This performance reflects a broader truth: Africa's legal systems are no longer peripheral to investment strategy — they are central to it. With global mining arbitrations up 60 percent in the last decade and over half involving African properties, the era of geology as the primary concern has ended.
Tanzania's courts demonstrate structured, statute-driven jurisprudence increasingly confident in managing complex disputes. Investors who engage early — through thoughtful contract design, disciplined jurisdictional planning, and evidence-based litigation strategy — are better positioned to manage risk.
In the next phase of African mining, success will belong not only to those who understand the geology beneath the ground, but to those who understand the legal architecture above it.
Amne Suedi is Founder and Managing Director of Shikana Investment and Advisory, International Business Lawyer, Honorary Consul of Switzerland in Zanzibar, Chairperson of the Switzerland-Tanzania Chamber of Commerce, and former Board Member of the Tanzania Investment Centre. She contributed to drafting Tanzania's Vision 2050 as an appointed expert to the Core Technical Team. You can reach her at [email protected]
