Wakilii

Attorney General v Sino Africa Medicines and Health Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 2 of 2016)

Tribunal · [2016] UGCADER 4 · 2016 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for cancellation of appointed arbitrator and costs
Decision
Application for cancellation of appointed arbitrator dismissed

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.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The tribunal dismissed the application for cancellation of the appointed arbitrator. The arbitration clause in the contract was a bare reference to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act without specifying rules for arbitrator selection. The applicant's expectations regarding a list of arbitrators and joint selection procedures were not contained in the contract or required by statute. Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act permits compulsory appointment where parties fail to agree, and the applicant presented no evidence of agreed rules requiring the procedures it sought.

Outcome

Application for cancellation of appointed arbitrator dismissed

Facts

The Attorney General applied to cancel an arbitrator appointed in a dispute with Sino Africa Medicines & Health Limited arising from a contract with the Ministry of Defence. The respondent served a statutory notice of intention to sue on 17 January 2014 after amicable discussions collapsed. The respondent filed High Court Civil Suit No. 463 of 2015 on 20 July 2015, unaware of arbitration clauses in the contract. The applicant filed its defence on 12 August 2016. On 23 August 2016, the arbitration clauses were brought to the respondent's attention, triggering an application for compulsory appointment of an arbitrator. The applicant argued it had the right to participate in selecting the arbitrator and that the parties should have agreed on selection procedures. The contract's dispute resolution clause required amicable negotiation and, failing that, arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act Cap.4, but contained no specific rules for arbitrator selection.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant was entitled to participate in selecting the arbitrator before compulsory appointment.
  2. Whether the respondent complied with the contractual requirement to negotiate or mutually consult before referring the dispute to arbitration.
  3. Whether the compulsory appointment of an arbitrator violated the parties' freedom to agree on the arbitrator of their choice.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Applicant to bear the respondent's costs of the application.

Rules and key headnotes

Arbitration — Appointment of Arbitrators — Compulsory Appointment — Bare Arbitration Clause
Where an arbitration clause refers the dispute to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act but does not specify rules for arbitrator selection, the statutory power under section 11 to effect compulsory appointment is not encumbered by expectations that parties must first agree on a list of arbitrators or hold meetings to select arbitrators.
Arbitration — Party Autonomy — Default Statutory Provisions
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, like the UNCITRAL Model Law, leaves parties free to carve out their own rules for conduct of arbitration proceedings. The Act provides default scenarios only where parties fail to agree on matters such as language of arbitration or arbitrator appointment procedures.
Arbitration — Appointment of Arbitrators — Qualifications and Independence
Under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, whilst appointing an arbitrator, due regard shall be paid to any qualifications listed by the agreement of the parties and to such considerations as are likely to secure the appointment of an independent and impartial arbitrator.
Contract Law — Dispute Resolution Clauses — Negotiation and Mutual Consultation
Where a party asserts that amicable discussions collapsed before serving a statutory notice and the opposing party fails to rebut this assertion through a rejoinder affidavit, it is taken as established that the contractual requirement for amicable attempts to negotiate or mutually consult was satisfied.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (1)

  • Sino Africa Medicines & Health Limited v Attorney General of Republic of Tanzania (CAD/ARB/17/2015)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Attorney General v Sino Africa Medicines and Health Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 2 of 2016) [2016] UGCADER 4 (12 November 2016)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.