Wakilii

B & N Biomass Limited v Okecho (Miscellaneous Cause 73 of 2022)

High Court · [2024] UGCOMMC 89 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application to set aside arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
Decision
Application to set aside arbitral award 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

Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed. Court held that it cannot sit in reconsideration of an arbitral award's merits outside the strict bounds of Section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The arbitral tribunal did consider and decide the applicant's counterclaim, expressly disallowing it at page 15 of the award after reviewing all evidence. No partiality was established. Delayed delivery of the award was waived by the applicant's failure to object when notified, and no prejudice from delay was proved.

Outcome

Application to set aside arbitral award dismissed

Facts

B & N Biomass Limited holds a timber tree planting license in Wankwayo Central Forest Reserve. On 23 June 2017, Okecho Harriet Amooti contracted with the Applicant to purchase thinnings from the forest. A dispute arose when the Respondent was expelled from the forest by the Applicant's agents, leading her to lodge an arbitration claim for breach of contract on 22 December 2021. The Applicant filed a reply and counterclaim alleging the Respondent sawed timber from harvested trees contrary to the contract. On 8 August 2022, the arbitrators issued an award allowing the Respondent's claim and disallowing the Applicant's counterclaim. The Applicant brought this application seeking to set aside the award, alleging the tribunal ignored the counterclaim, acted with partiality, and delivered the award out of time.

Issues

  1. Whether the arbitral award should be set aside.

Orders

  • This application is hereby dismissed.
  • Costs of this application are awarded to the Respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Arbitration & ADR — Judicial Intervention — Scope of Court's Power to Set Aside Award
Outside the bounds of Section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, an arbitral award can only be challenged and set aside on very narrow grounds as prescribed under Section 34(2) of the Act, including circumstances where the award was procured by corruption, fraud or undue means, where there was evident partiality or corruption in one or more of the arbitrators, and where the award is not in accordance with the Act.
Arbitration & ADR — Judicial Review of Awards — No Appeal on Facts
A court has no power to sit in appeal of an arbitral award and cannot reconsider the merits of the award per se except as prescribed in Section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. An arbitrator is the first and final trier of fact in all arbitrable disputes. Only findings of law may be interrupted through an appeal on questions of law if the parties expressly anticipated such an appeal in the arbitration agreement.
Arbitration & ADR — Award Writing — No Prescribed Format
There is no particular format required in the evaluation of evidence by arbitrators. Award writing is a matter of style by individual arbitrators. An award will be valid once it is the arbitrator's final reasoned determination of the rights and duties of the parties based on the evidence adduced. There is no requirement that the arbitrator should comment on each and every aspect of the body of evidence adduced.
Arbitration & ADR — Procedural Objections — Waiver by Failure to Object
A party who proceeds with arbitration without raising an objection to a failure to comply with any part of the applicable arbitration rules is deemed to have waived his right to object. Where a tribunal communicates to counsel that an award will be delivered on a specified date and counsel does not object, the party is estopped from raising late delivery of the award as a ground to set it aside.
Arbitration & ADR — Delay — Insufficient Ground for Setting Aside Award
In order for delay to be a sufficient ground for setting aside an award, the party intending to set aside the award should prove and establish the consequences of the delay and its effects on the award. A court will be reluctant to set aside an award on grounds of delayed delivery if there is no proof that the delay prejudiced the party seeking to have the award set aside in some significant way.

Legislation cited (11)

Cases cited (3)

  • Roko Construction Ltd v Kobusingye Janet (HCMC No. 22 of 2021)
  • Labeja Ticiyano v Olanya Bosco (HC Civil Appeal No. 28 of 2018)
  • Fountain Publishers Ltd v Harriet Nalunga & Anor (HC Arbitration Cause No. 1 of 2011)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

B & N Biomass Limited v Okecho (Miscellaneous Cause 73 of 2022) [2024] UGCommC 89 (15 March 2024)
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.