Wakilii

Geomatic Solutions Ltd v Uganda National Roads Authority (KNA-ARB-004-2019; Misc. Application No. 0496 of 2022; Misc. Application No. 1104 of 2020)

High Court · [2026] UGCOMMC 236 · 2026 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appeal out of time against dismissal of application to set aside arbitral award
Decision
Application for leave to appeal 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 application for leave to appeal under section 38(3)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act requires the applicant to demonstrate a specific question of law arising from the arbitration agreement as agreed by the parties. It is insufficient to merely allege that questions of law exist or that the judge erred in law. Where no such agreed question of law is identified, the application falls outside the scope of section 38 and must be dismissed.

Outcome

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs

Facts

The applicant filed Misc. Application No. 1104 of 2020 seeking to set aside a final arbitral award made under Arbitration No. KNA/ARB/004/2019. That application was dismissed with costs on grounds that the applicant failed to prove any grounds for setting aside the arbitral award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The applicant then brought the present application seeking leave to appeal against the dismissal and leave to file the appeal out of time. The applicant's managing director averred that the application was filed without delay, had merit, raised important issues of law, and had likelihood of success. The respondent's senior legal manager opposed the application, contending that the applicant failed to meet the requirements for granting leave under section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has sufficient grounds for grant of leave to appeal.
  2. Whether the court has jurisdiction to enlarge the time for filing the intended appeal.
  3. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Arbitration & ADR — Leave to Appeal — Requirements under Section 38 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
Section 38(3)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act can only be invoked where there has been an application by the parties and determination by the court in respect to questions of law arising in arbitration which have been agreed upon by the parties in the arbitration agreement.
Arbitration & ADR — Leave to Appeal — Burden of Proof
For a party to succeed under section 38(3)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, it is not sufficient to allege that there exists a question of law to be determined or that the learned judge erred in law. A litigant must point to a particular question of law stemming from the arbitration agreement as agreed by the parties.

Legislation cited (13)

Cases cited (1)

  • Babcon Limited v Mbale Resort Hotel Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Geomatic Solutions Ltd v Uganda National Roads Authority (KNA-ARB-004-2019; Misc. Application No. 0496 of 2022; Misc. Application No. 1104 of 2020) [2026] UGCommC 236 (6 March 2026)
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.