Alcon International Limited v Standard Charted Bank of Uganda and Others (Reference 6 of 2010)

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

Holding

The East African Court of Justice struck out a Reference seeking enforcement of an arbitral award on the ground that parallel proceedings relating to the same matter were ongoing in Uganda's Supreme Court. The Court held that it was improper for the claimant to abandon litigation before Uganda's courts and seek sanctuary in the EACJ, constituting forum shopping. The Court declined to determine whether a private company could be impleaded under Article 30 of the Treaty or whether the Protocol extended the Court's jurisdiction.

Outcome

Reference struck out on preliminary objection — claimant found to be forum shopping by bringing matter to EACJ while proceedings pending in Uganda's Supreme Court

Facts

In 1994, Alcon International Limited contracted to construct Workers House in Kampala for Uganda's National Social Security Fund (NSSF). NSSF terminated the contract and the dispute was referred to arbitration. Alcon obtained an arbitral award for USD 8,858,469.97 plus interest and costs. NSSF challenged the award in Uganda's Commercial Division of the High Court, which affirmed it. NSSF appealed to the Court of Appeal and subsequently to the Supreme Court (Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2009), where the matter remained pending. A dispute arose over which Alcon International Limited was the proper beneficiary of the award. While the Supreme Court proceedings were ongoing, Alcon brought a Reference to the East African Court of Justice against Standard Chartered Bank of Uganda, the Attorney General of Uganda, and the Registrar of the High Court, seeking orders directing payment of the decretal sum and seeking declarations on the EACJ's jurisdiction under the Treaty and the Common Market Protocol.

Issues

1. Whether the Reference is properly before the Court as against the 1st and 3rd Respondents
2. Whether the Reference is time-barred
3. Whether the Claimant has rights under the Protocol on the Establishment of the East African Community Common Market in respect of acts which arose prior to the coming into force of the Protocol
4. Whether the East African Court of Justice has jurisdiction to entertain a Reference against a private limited liability company that is neither a Partner State nor an institution of the Community
5. Whether the Reference should be struck out on grounds of forum shopping where parallel proceedings are ongoing in national courts

Orders

• Reference struck out with costs.
• Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (2)

• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Articles 27(2), 30, and 151
• Protocol on the Establishment of the East African Community Common Market Articles 29(2) and 54(2)(b)

Cases cited (4)

• Prof. Peter Anyang' Nyongo and 10 Others v Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya and 5 Others (Reference No. 1 of 2006)
• Modern Holdings (E.A) Limited v Kenya Ports Authority (Reference No. 1 of 2008)
• National Social Security Fund and W. H. Sentoogo t/a Sentoogo and Partners v Alcon International Limited (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2004)
• Supreme Court of Uganda Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2009

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.