Wakilii

BM Steel Ltd v Kilembe Mines Ltd Ruling 3 (HCT-CC-00-MA 579 of 2005)

High Court · [2005] UGCOMMC 48 · 2005 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appeal against order setting aside arbitral award
Decision
Application dismissed with costs

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

An order setting aside an arbitral award is not appealable either as of right or with leave of court. Section 77 of the Civil Procedure Act lists specific orders in arbitration from which appeals lie, but does not include orders setting aside arbitral awards. Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules permit appeals only from orders made under those rules; setting aside arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, not the Civil Procedure Rules, and therefore falls outside the scope of Order 40.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs

Facts

BM Steel Ltd applied for leave to appeal against a High Court order dated 14 July 2005 that had set aside an arbitral award between itself and Kilembe Mines Ltd. The court raised the threshold question of whether the applicant had any right of appeal at all. Counsel for the respondent initially argued the application was misconceived because the applicant had a right of appeal as of right, then reversed position to argue no right of appeal existed. Counsel for the applicant submitted that Section 68 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules provided the basis for appeal.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has a right of appeal, either as of right or with leave of court, against an order setting aside an arbitral award.
  2. Whether Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules permit an appeal from an order setting aside an arbitral award.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Arbitration & ADR — Appeals from Arbitral Proceedings — Orders Setting Aside Awards — Appealability
An order setting aside an arbitral award is not appealable either as of right or with leave of court, as it does not fall within the categories of orders listed in Section 77 of the Civil Procedure Act from which appeals are permitted.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Section 77 Civil Procedure Act — Exhaustive List of Appealable Orders
Section 77 of the Civil Procedure Act operates to bar all appeals from orders of the High Court save those expressly listed in subsections (a) to (h), notwithstanding the general right of appeal in Section 68.
Civil Procedure — Appeals — Order 40 Civil Procedure Rules — Scope of Application
Order 40 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules permit appeals only from orders made under those rules; they cannot operate to confer a right of appeal from orders made under other legislation such as the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Arbitration & ADR — Procedure — Applicable Law — Arbitration and Conciliation Act
Setting aside arbitral awards is governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, not by the Civil Procedure Act and its rules.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (2)

  • BD Bilmoria & Another v TD Bilmoria [1962] EA 198
  • Rene Dol v Official Receiver of Uganda (1951) 21 EACA 116

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

BM Steel Ltd v Kilembe Mines Ltd Ruling 3 (HCT-CC-00-MA 579 of 2005) [2005] UGCommC 48 (31 August 2005)
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.