Uganda Case Law

Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited v AYA Investments Uganda Limited

Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa Limited v AYA Investments Uganda Limited (Civil Miscellaneous Application 1104 of 2023) [2023] UGCA 302 (1 November 2023)

Court

Court of Appeal of Uganda

Case number

Civil Miscellaneous Application 1104 of 2023

Judge

Egonda-Ntende, JA, Monica K. Mugenyi, JA, Kihika ,JA

The Court of Appeal struck out an appeal as out of time and held that no appeal lay from the High Court’s Section 34 ruling on setting aside an arbitral award.

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Appeal Timeliness
• Right Of Appeal
• Extension Of Time
• Costs Award
• Appeal-timeliness

Christian Counselling Fellowship v Ibinonga Construction & General Merchandise

Christian Counselling Fellowship v Ibinonga Construction & General Merchandise (Miscellaneous Application No. 1269 of 2020) [2023] UGCommC 8 (11 January 2023)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 1269 of 2020

Judge

Abinyo, J

The application to set aside the arbitral award was dismissed because it was filed outside the statutory 30-day period prescribed by section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The supporting affidavit was struck out for being sworn by a person without express authority from the applicant company, contrary to Order 3 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules. Additionally, portions of the affidavit were found to be argumentative and non-compliant with Order 19 Rule 3. Without a valid affidavit in support, the application was rendered incompetent and dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Affidavit Validity
• Limitation Periods
• Appointment Of Arbitrator

Aids Support Organisations v Tuba(Uganda Baltimore Alliance ) (Misc Cause 9 of 2022)

Aids Support Organisations v Tuba(Uganda Baltimore Alliance ) (Misc Cause 9 of 2022) [2022] UGCommC 160 (6 June 2022)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Misc Cause 9 of 2022

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The High Court dismissed an application to set aside an arbitral award, finding no proven incapacity, bias, or public policy breach under section 34.

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Capacity To Contract
• Public Policy Exception
• Company Registration
• Contractual Obligations
• Arbitral-award-challenge

Roko Construction Limited v Kobusingye

Roko Construction Limited v Kobusingye (Miscellaneous Cause 22 of 2021) [2022] UGCommC 104 (17 January 2022)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause 22 of 2021

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The High Court held that the grounds for setting aside an arbitral award under Ugandan law are strictly limited to procedural irregularities, evident partiality, violation of public policy, or errors of law apparent on the face of the award. The court found no evidence of actual or apparent bias by the arbitrator, as the site visit and observations were disclosed and both parties had the opportunity to address the evidence. The award was not contrary to public policy, as there was no illegality or result that shocked the conscience of the court. However, the court found that the arbitrator er…

Source excerpt

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Public Policy Exception
• Contractual Damages
• Arbitrator Impartiality
• Construction Contracts

Parsha International Limited T/a Champion Bet /Slots v Homebet Limited

Parsha International Limited T/a Champion Bet /Slots v Homebet Limited (Civil Miscellaneous Application 598 of 2021) [2021] UGCommC 168 (19 July 2021)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Civil Miscellaneous Application 598 of 2021

Judge

Stephen Mubiru, J

The High Court dismissed an application to set aside an arbitral award, holding it was not time-barred and disclosed no ground under the Arbitration Act.

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Public Policy Exception
• Contractual Compliance
• Franchise Agreements
• Arbitral-award-challenge
• Public-policy-exception

BSK International School Ltd v Katungye

BSK International School Ltd v Katungye (Miscellaneous Application No. 131 of 2018) [2018] UGCommC 42 (29 June 2018)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Application No. 131 of 2018

The court found that the High Court was not exercising original jurisdiction in handling Misc. Application No. 1007 of 2017, and therefore the applicant had no automatic right of appeal. Even if such a right existed, the applicant failed to satisfy the mandatory conditions for stay of execution, particularly the requirement to provide security for due performance as previously ordered by the court. The applicant's failure to comply with the court's order to deposit security within the stipulated time constituted contempt of court. The application for stay of execution and proceedings was ther…

Source excerpt

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Stay Of Execution
• Security For Performance
• Jurisdiction Of High Court

One Solutions Ltd v Eastern and Southern African Management Institute

One Solutions Ltd v Eastern and Southern African Management Institute (Miscellaneous Cause No. 33 of 2015) [2017] UGCommC 247 (15 August 2017)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause No. 33 of 2015

The High Court held it lacked jurisdiction to entertain a challenge to an arbitral award because the parties had not expressly agreed to court intervention under Section 38.

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Jurisdiction Of Court
• Contractual Conditions
• Tenancy Agreement Dispute
• Arbitration
• Arbitral-award-challenge

Tibeingana v Vijay Reddy & Anor

Tibeingana v Vijay Reddy & Anor (Miscellaneous Cause No. 10 of 2016) [2016] UGCommC 221 (21 December 2016)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Miscellaneous Cause No. 10 of 2016

The court found that the arbitral award of US$357,592 was based on the parties' agreement and the Applicant's admission of indebtedness. The sum included agreed interest and represented the contractual consideration for the Respondent's withdrawal from the partnership. The award of interest at 24% per annum was excessive, unconscionable, and not supported by the agreement, which provided for 11% per annum. The arbitrator's omission to consider the Applicant's financial hardship and market rates constituted an error of principle. The court substituted the interest rate with 11% per annum from…

Source excerpt

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Interest Rate Disputes
• Contractual Indebtedness
• Public Policy Review

SDV Transami Ltd v Agrimag Ltd and Anor (HCT-00-CC-AB 2 of 2006)

SDV Transami Ltd v Agrimag Ltd and Anor (HCT-00-CC-AB 2 of 2006) [2008] UGCommC 33 (18 June 2008)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

HCT-00-CC-AB 2 of 2006

The High Court dismissed an application to set aside an arbitral award, holding that the applicant failed to show any statutory ground under Uganda’s Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Carrier Liability
• Subrogation Rights
• Special Damages
• Gross Negligence
• Contractual Terms

R.R.P (U) Ltd v Assist (U) Ltd (Misc.Abitration Cause No. 4 of 2002)

R.R.P (U) Ltd v Assist (U) Ltd (Misc.Abitration Cause No. 4 of 2002) [2002] UGCommC 18 (25 September 2002)

Court

Commercial Court of Uganda

Case number

Misc.Abitration Cause No. 4 of 2002

High Court partly set aside an arbitral award for bias, finding the arbitrator wrongly imported force majeure and failed to award general damages after finding breach.

• Arbitral Award Challenge
• Contractual Breach
• Impartiality Of Arbitrator
• Damages Assessment
• Arbitral-award-challenge
• Arbitrator-bias